GPT-5.1 Codex mini vs Seed 2.0 Lite vs Trendyol Asure 12B
Seed 2.0 Lite comes out ahead, 73 to 59 and 54 on our weighted score.
OpenAIGPT-5.1 Codex mini
59/100- ECI—
- Price$0.25 / $2.00
- Context400K
- Our pick
ByteDance SeedSeed 2.0 Lite
73/100- ECI—
- Price$0.089 / $0.534
- Context256K
Trendyol
Trendyol Asure 12B
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.50
- Context131K
Seed 2.0 Lite is our pick
Seed 2.0 Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against GPT-5.1 Codex mini (59) and Trendyol Asure 12B (54). It leads on inputs & features. GPT-5.1 Codex mini wins on context window. 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 priceTrendyol Asure 12BTrendyol Asure 12B $0.20 · Seed 2.0 Lite $0.20 · GPT-5.1 Codex mini $0.688 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGPT-5.1 Codex miniGPT-5.1 Codex mini 400,000 · Seed 2.0 Lite 256,000 · Trendyol Asure 12B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsSeed 2.0 LiteGPT-5.1 Codex mini: Text, Images · Seed 2.0 Lite: Text, Images, Video · Trendyol Asure 12B: Text, Images
- Self-hostingTrendyol Asure 12BPublishes downloadable weights (Gemma)
| Measure | Weight | GPT-5.1 Codex mini | Seed 2.0 Lite | Trendyol Asure 12B |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 58 | 83 | 83 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 70 | 80 | 25 |
| Context window | 20% | 44 | 36 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 59/100 | 73/100 | 54/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | GPT-5.1 Codex miniOpenAI | Seed 2.0 LiteByteDance Seed | Trendyol Asure 12BTrendyol |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.25 | $0.089 (best) | $0.10 |
| Output | $2.00 | $0.534 | $0.50 (best) |
| Cached input | — | $0.018 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.688 | $0.20 | $0.20 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Over 32K: $0.134 / $0.802 | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 10 providers | Official Volcengine Ark API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 400,000 tokens (best) | 256,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens (best) | 32,000 tokens | — |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | No |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary | OpenGemma |
| API model ID | — | doubao-seed-2-0-lite-260428 | — |
| API providers | 10 (best) | 6 | 1 |
| Released | Nov 13, 2025 | Feb 14, 2026 | Feb 19, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 30, 2024 | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- GPT-5.1 Codex mini$6.50
- Seed 2.0 Lite$1.96
- Trendyol Asure 12B$2.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: GPT-5.1 Codex mini, Seed 2.0 Lite or Trendyol Asure 12B?
Seed 2.0 Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against GPT-5.1 Codex mini (59) and Trendyol Asure 12B (54). It leads on inputs & features. GPT-5.1 Codex mini wins on context window. 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, GPT-5.1 Codex mini, Seed 2.0 Lite or Trendyol Asure 12B?
Trendyol Asure 12B is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.50 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Seed 2.0 Lite costs $0.089 input / $0.534 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price); GPT-5.1 Codex mini costs $0.25 input / $2.00 output per million tokens (median across 10 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.20 per million tokens for Trendyol Asure 12B versus $0.20 for Seed 2.0 Lite (1× as much) and $0.688 for GPT-5.1 Codex mini (3.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. GPT-5.1 Codex mini has not been scored yet, Seed 2.0 Lite has not been scored yet and Trendyol Asure 12B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for GPT-5.1 Codex mini, Seed 2.0 Lite and Trendyol Asure 12B yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that Trendyol Asure 12B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-5.1 Codex mini has the largest context window at 400,000 tokens, against 256,000 for Seed 2.0 Lite and 131,072 for Trendyol Asure 12B. Maximum output per response: GPT-5.1 Codex mini up to 128,000, Seed 2.0 Lite up to 32,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
GPT-5.1 Codex mini accepts text and images; Seed 2.0 Lite accepts text, images and video; Trendyol Asure 12B accepts text and images. Seed 2.0 Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Trendyol Asure 12B publishes its weights (Gemma) and can be self-hosted; GPT-5.1 Codex mini and Seed 2.0 Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Trendyol Asure 12B is the newest, released Feb 19, 2026. Seed 2.0 Lite came out Feb 14, 2026; GPT-5.1 Codex mini came out Nov 13, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GPT-5.1 Codex mini Sep 30, 2024.
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.
