Noometry

Model comparison

Seed 2.0 Pro vs Qwen3 8B

Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 8B costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Seed 2.0 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Seed 2.0 Pro ByteDance Seed

43.2

Rank #96 Confirmed

Qwen3 8B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.7

Rank #238 Confirmed

Summary

  • The widest gap is in coding, where Seed 2.0 Pro leads 43.5 to 34.0.
  • Qwen3 8B is cheaper at $0.18 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $0.50 / $3 for Seed 2.0 Pro.
  • Seed 2.0 Pro accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 8B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Seed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
ProviderByteDance SeedAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index43.233.7
Released2026-02-142025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window256K131K
Max output128K8K
Input $ / M tokens$0.50$0.18
Output $ / M tokens$3$0.70
Results tracked2011

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Seed 2.0 Pro leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.5 (#86), Qwen3 8B: 34.0 (#248)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
SciCode—22.6%
LMArena Coding1472—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: —, Qwen3 8B: 30.2 (#78)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—42.6%

Reasoning Seed 2.0 Pro leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 24.1 (#165), Qwen3 8B: 16.6 (#303)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
NYT Connections (extended)28.4%—
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles—5%
Thematic Generalization57.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1453—
DTBench—59.7%
LMCA—8.8%
Epoch Capabilities Index—136.17

Math Seed 2.0 Pro leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.3 (#108), Qwen3 8B: 34.9 (#191)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—56.1%
LMArena Math1439—

Knowledge Seed 2.0 Pro leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.2 (#122), Qwen3 8B: 36.1 (#173)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
GPQA Diamond—56.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—4.8%
LMArena Expert1440—

Multimodal Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: 41.5 (#35), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
LMArena Vision1274—

Multilingual Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.5 (#39), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
LMArena Non-English1441—
LMArena Chinese1489—
LMArena French1471—
LMArena German1442—
LMArena Japanese1408—
LMArena Korean1411—
LMArena Russian1449—
LMArena Spanish1460—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.5 (#91), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
LMArena Instruction Following1414—

Long Context Seed 2.0 Pro leads

Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#90), Qwen3 8B: 37.9 (#210)

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
Fiction.LiveBench—62.1%
LMArena Longer Query1428—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Seed 2.0 Pro: 62.9 (#69), Qwen3 8B: —

BenchmarkSeed 2.0 ProQwen3 8B
LMArena Text1448—
LMArena Creative Writing1406—
LMArena Multi-Turn1441—

Frequently asked questions

Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than Qwen3 8B?

Seed 2.0 Pro is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.2 to 33.7 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 8B costs 3.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Seed 2.0 Pro's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Seed 2.0 Pro or Qwen3 8B?

Qwen3 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.18 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Seed 2.0 Pro lists at $0.50 and $3.

Is Seed 2.0 Pro or Qwen3 8B better for coding?

Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 43.5 versus 34.0 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Seed 2.0 Pro does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and Qwen3 8B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 8B has 11.

Related comparisons

Go deeper