ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

DeepSeek OCR 2 vs Qwen3.5 27B vs Seed 2.0 Code

Qwen3.5 27B comes out ahead, 61 to 57 and 32 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. DeepSeek

    DeepSeek OCR 2

    Released Jan 27, 2026

    32/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.89 / $1.47
    • Context8K
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 27B

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    61/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.30 / $2.40
    • Context262K
  3. ByteDance Seed

    Seed 2.0 Code

    Released Feb 14, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.475 / $2.37
    • Context262K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 27B is our pick

Qwen3.5 27B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Seed 2.0 Code (57) and DeepSeek OCR 2 (32). It leads on price and 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 priceQwen3.5 27BQwen3.5 27B $0.825 · Seed 2.0 Code $0.95 · DeepSeek OCR 2 $1.03 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 27B and Seed 2.0 CodeQwen3.5 27B 262,144 · Seed 2.0 Code 262,144 · DeepSeek OCR 2 8,192 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.5 27BDeepSeek OCR 2: Text, Images · Qwen3.5 27B: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Seed 2.0 Code: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingDeepSeek OCR 2 and Qwen3.5 27BPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightDeepSeek OCR 2Qwen3.5 27BSeed 2.0 Code
Price50%495451
Inputs & features30%259080
Context window20%03737
Overall100%32/10061/10057/100

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.

DeepSeek OCR 2 vs Qwen3.5 27B vs Seed 2.0 Code specifications side by side
SpecificationDeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeekQwen3.5 27BAlibaba (Qwen)Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.89$0.30 (best)$0.475
Output$1.47 (best)$2.40$2.37
Cached input——$0.095
Blended (3:1)$1.03$0.825 (best)$0.95
Long-context rateSame rateSame rateOver 32K: $0.712 / $3.56
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Volcengine Ark API
Limits
Context window8,192 tokens262,144 tokens (best)262,144 tokens (best)
Max output8,192 tokens65,536 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesYes
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoYesNo
VideoNoYesYes
ReasoningNoYesYesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max
Tool callingNoYesYes
Structured outputNoYesYes
Availability
WeightsOpenOpenProprietary
API model ID—qwen3.5-27bdoubao-seed-2-0-code-preview-260215
API providers216 (best)10
ReleasedJan 27, 2026Feb 23, 2026Feb 14, 2026
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.

  • DeepSeek OCR 2$11.83
  • Qwen3.5 27B$7.80
  • Seed 2.0 Code$9.50
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: DeepSeek OCR 2, Qwen3.5 27B or Seed 2.0 Code?

Qwen3.5 27B is the better all-round choice, scoring 61/100 against Seed 2.0 Code (57) and DeepSeek OCR 2 (32). It leads on price and 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, DeepSeek OCR 2, Qwen3.5 27B or Seed 2.0 Code?

Qwen3.5 27B is cheaper at $0.30 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Seed 2.0 Code costs $0.475 input / $2.37 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price); DeepSeek OCR 2 costs $0.89 input / $1.47 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.825 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 27B versus $0.95 for Seed 2.0 Code (1.2× as much) and $1.03 for DeepSeek OCR 2 (1.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. DeepSeek OCR 2 has not been scored yet, Qwen3.5 27B has not been scored yet and Seed 2.0 Code has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for DeepSeek OCR 2, Qwen3.5 27B and Seed 2.0 Code yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that DeepSeek OCR 2 does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.

Which has the bigger context window?

Qwen3.5 27B and Seed 2.0 Code have the largest context windows (262,144 and 262,144 tokens), against 8,192 for DeepSeek OCR 2. Maximum output per response: DeepSeek OCR 2 up to 8,192, Qwen3.5 27B up to 65,536, Seed 2.0 Code up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

DeepSeek OCR 2 accepts text and images; Qwen3.5 27B accepts text, images, audio and video; Seed 2.0 Code accepts text, images and video. Qwen3.5 27B handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

DeepSeek OCR 2 and Qwen3.5 27B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Code is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 27B is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. Seed 2.0 Code came out Feb 14, 2026; DeepSeek OCR 2 came out Jan 27, 2026.

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 Oct 4, 2026.