ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

Baichuan M2 32B vs Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) vs Seed 1.6 Flash

Seed 1.6 Flash comes out ahead, 81 to 72 and 58 on our weighted score.

  1. Baichuan

    Baichuan M2 32B

    Released Aug 13, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.07 / $0.07
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Baichuan M2 32B

  2. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)

    Released Oct 15, 2025

    72/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.022 / $0.215
    • Context262K
    Full specs Remove Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)
  3. Our pick

    ByteDance Seed

    Seed 1.6 Flash

    Released Aug 28, 2025Deprecated

    81/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.022 / $0.223
    • Context256K
    Full specs Remove Seed 1.6 Flash
01 — Verdict

Seed 1.6 Flash is our pick

Seed 1.6 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 81/100 against Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) (72) and Baichuan M2 32B (58). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

  • CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
  • Lowest priceBaichuan M2 32BBaichuan M2 32B $0.07 · Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) $0.07 · Seed 1.6 Flash $0.072 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) 262,144 · Seed 1.6 Flash 256,000 · Baichuan M2 32B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSeed 1.6 FlashBaichuan M2 32B: Text · Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud): Text, Images · Seed 1.6 Flash: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingBaichuan M2 32BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightBaichuan M2 32BQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Seed 1.6 Flash
Price50%100100100
Inputs & features30%105080
Context window20%253736
Overall100%58/10072/10081/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Baichuan M2 32B vs Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) vs Seed 1.6 Flash specifications side by side
SpecificationBaichuan M2 32BBaichuanQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Alibaba (Qwen)Seed 1.6 FlashByteDance Seed
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.07$0.022 (best)$0.022
Output$0.07 (best)$0.215$0.223
Cached input——$0.0044
Blended (3:1)$0.07 (best)$0.07$0.072
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateOver 32K: $0.045 / $0.445
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 1 providersOfficial Volcengine Ark API
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens262,144 tokens (best)256,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)32,768 tokens32,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesNoYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoNoNoYes
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingNoYesYes
Structured outputNoNoYes
Availability
WeightsOpenApache-2.0ProprietaryProprietary
API model ID——doubao-seed-1-6-flash-250828
API providers115 (best)
ReleasedAug 13, 2025Oct 15, 2025Aug 28, 2025
Knowledge cutoff———
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Baichuan M2 32B$0.84
  • Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)$0.65
  • Seed 1.6 Flash$0.668
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Baichuan M2 32B, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) or Seed 1.6 Flash?

Seed 1.6 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 81/100 against Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) (72) and Baichuan M2 32B (58). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.

Which is cheaper, Baichuan M2 32B, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) or Seed 1.6 Flash?

Baichuan M2 32B is cheaper at $0.07 input / $0.07 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) costs $0.022 input / $0.215 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider); Seed 1.6 Flash costs $0.022 input / $0.223 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.07 per million tokens for Baichuan M2 32B versus $0.07 for Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) (1× as much) and $0.072 for Seed 1.6 Flash (1× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Baichuan M2 32B has not been scored yet, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) has not been scored yet and Seed 1.6 Flash has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Baichuan M2 32B, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) and Seed 1.6 Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Baichuan M2 32B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 256,000 for Seed 1.6 Flash and 131,072 for Baichuan M2 32B. Maximum output per response: Baichuan M2 32B up to 131,072, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) up to 32,768, Seed 1.6 Flash up to 32,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Baichuan M2 32B accepts text; Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) accepts text and images; Seed 1.6 Flash accepts text, images and video. Seed 1.6 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

Baichuan M2 32B publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) and Seed 1.6 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) is the newest, released Oct 15, 2025. Seed 1.6 Flash came out Aug 28, 2025; Baichuan M2 32B came out Aug 13, 2025.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons