Model comparison
Seed 2.0 Pro vs Ring-2.6-1T
Seed 2.0 Pro has enough public results to be ranked (#97); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
ByteDance Seed
Ant Group (inclusionAI)Summary
- Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ByteDance Seed | Ant Group (inclusionAI) |
| Noometry Index | 42.5 | 36.3 |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2026-05-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 256K | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.50 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $3 | — |
| Results tracked | 20 | 3 |
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: 42.9 (#84), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | — | 42.4% |
| LMArena Coding | 1472 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 432.57 |
Reasoning Ring-2.6-1T leads
Seed 2.0 Pro: 23.1 (#167), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 28.4% | — |
| CritPt | — | 3.7% |
| Thematic Generalization | 57.1% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1453 | — |
Math Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 36.5 (#110), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1440 | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 39.6 (#119), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1440 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 40.8 (#34), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1275 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 54.8 (#37), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1442 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1490 | — |
| LMArena French | 1470 | — |
| LMArena German | 1443 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1408 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1412 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1450 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1460 | — |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 74.7 (#86), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1414 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 43.6 (#85), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | — |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Seed 2.0 Pro: 63.0 (#66), Ring-2.6-1T: —
| Benchmark | Seed 2.0 Pro | Ring-2.6-1T |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1406 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1441 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Seed 2.0 Pro better than Ring-2.6-1T?
Seed 2.0 Pro has enough public results to be ranked (#97); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.
Is Seed 2.0 Pro or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?
Seed 2.0 Pro scores higher on coding benchmarks: 42.9 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Seed 2.0 Pro and Ring-2.6-1T share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Seed 2.0 Pro has 20 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.