ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

MiMo-V2.5 vs Seed 2.0 Lite vs Step 3.5 Flash 2603

MiMo-V2.5 comes out ahead, 79 to 73 and 62 on our weighted score, though Step 3.5 Flash 2603 is 14% cheaper per token.

  1. Our pick

    Xiaomi

    MiMo-V2.5

    Released Apr 22, 2026

    79/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.14 / $0.28
    • Context1.05M
  2. ByteDance Seed

    Seed 2.0 Lite

    Released Feb 14, 2026

    73/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.089 / $0.534
    • Context256K
  3. StepFun

    Step 3.5 Flash 2603

    Released Apr 2, 2026

    62/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.10 / $0.30
    • Context256K
01 — Verdict

MiMo-V2.5 is our pick

MiMo-V2.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Seed 2.0 Lite (73) and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 (62). It leads on context window. Step 3.5 Flash 2603 wins on price. 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 priceStep 3.5 Flash 2603Step 3.5 Flash 2603 $0.15 · MiMo-V2.5 $0.175 · Seed 2.0 Lite $0.20 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextMiMo-V2.5MiMo-V2.5 1,048,576 · Seed 2.0 Lite 256,000 · Step 3.5 Flash 2603 256,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsMiMo-V2.5MiMo-V2.5: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Seed 2.0 Lite: Text, Images, Video · Step 3.5 Flash 2603: Text
  • Self-hostingMiMo-V2.5 and Step 3.5 Flash 2603Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMiMo-V2.5Seed 2.0 LiteStep 3.5 Flash 2603
Price50%868389
Inputs & features30%808035
Context window20%613636
Overall100%79/10073/10062/100

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.

MiMo-V2.5 vs Seed 2.0 Lite vs Step 3.5 Flash 2603 specifications side by side
SpecificationMiMo-V2.5XiaomiSeed 2.0 LiteByteDance SeedStep 3.5 Flash 2603StepFun
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.14$0.089 (best)$0.10
Output$0.28 (best)$0.534$0.30
Cached input$0.0028 (best)$0.018$0.02
Blended (3:1)$0.175$0.20$0.15 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateOver 32K: $0.134 / $0.802Same rate
Price sourceOfficial Xiaomi APIOfficial Volcengine Ark APIOfficial StepFun (Global) API
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)256,000 tokens256,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens32,000 tokens256,000 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioYesNoNo
VideoYesYesNo
ReasoningYesYesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · maxYeslow · high
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputNoYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenProprietaryOpen
API model IDmimo-v2.5doubao-seed-2-0-lite-260428step-3.5-flash-2603
API providers21 (best)63
ReleasedApr 22, 2026Feb 14, 2026Apr 2, 2026
Knowledge cutoffDec 2024—Jan 2025
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.

  • MiMo-V2.5$1.96
  • Seed 2.0 Lite$1.96
  • Step 3.5 Flash 2603$1.60
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: MiMo-V2.5, Seed 2.0 Lite or Step 3.5 Flash 2603?

MiMo-V2.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Seed 2.0 Lite (73) and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 (62). It leads on context window. Step 3.5 Flash 2603 wins on price. 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, MiMo-V2.5, Seed 2.0 Lite or Step 3.5 Flash 2603?

Step 3.5 Flash 2603 is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.30 output per million tokens (official StepFun (Global) API price). MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.14 input / $0.28 output per million tokens (official Xiaomi API price); Seed 2.0 Lite costs $0.089 input / $0.534 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.15 per million tokens for Step 3.5 Flash 2603 versus $0.175 for MiMo-V2.5 (1.2× as much) and $0.20 for Seed 2.0 Lite (1.3× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. MiMo-V2.5 has not been scored yet, Seed 2.0 Lite has not been scored yet and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for MiMo-V2.5, Seed 2.0 Lite and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

MiMo-V2.5 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 256,000 for Seed 2.0 Lite and 256,000 for Step 3.5 Flash 2603. Maximum output per response: MiMo-V2.5 up to 131,072, Seed 2.0 Lite up to 32,000, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 up to 256,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

MiMo-V2.5 accepts text, images, audio and video; Seed 2.0 Lite accepts text, images and video; Step 3.5 Flash 2603 accepts text. MiMo-V2.5 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

MiMo-V2.5 and Step 3.5 Flash 2603 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Lite is proprietary.

Which is newer?

MiMo-V2.5 is the newest, released Apr 22, 2026. Step 3.5 Flash 2603 came out Apr 2, 2026; Seed 2.0 Lite came out Feb 14, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: MiMo-V2.5 Dec 2024, Step 3.5 Flash 2603 Jan 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 Oct 4, 2026.