ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Nov 2, 2026

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

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

  1. 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

  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. Baichuan

    Baichuan M2 32B

    Released Aug 13, 2025

    58/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.07 / $0.07
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Baichuan M2 32B
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 FlashSeed 1.6 Flash: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud): Text, Images · Baichuan M2 32B: Text
  • Self-hostingBaichuan M2 32BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
How the score is built
MeasureWeightSeed 1.6 FlashQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Baichuan M2 32B
Price50%100100100
Inputs & features30%805010
Context window20%363725
Overall100%81/10072/10058/100

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.

Seed 1.6 Flash vs Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) vs Baichuan M2 32B specifications side by side
SpecificationSeed 1.6 FlashByteDance SeedQwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud)Alibaba (Qwen)Baichuan M2 32BBaichuan
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)———
ECI rank———
Price per million tokens
Input$0.022$0.022 (best)$0.07
Output$0.223$0.215$0.07 (best)
Cached input$0.0044——
Blended (3:1)$0.072$0.07$0.07 (best)
Long-context rateOver 32K: $0.045 / $0.445Same rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Volcengine Ark APIMedian of 1 providersMedian of 1 providers
Limits
Context window256,000 tokens262,144 tokens (best)131,072 tokens
Max output32,000 tokens32,768 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoYesNoNo
ReasoningYesNoYes
Tool callingYesYesNo
Structured outputYesNoNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryOpenApache-2.0
API model IDdoubao-seed-1-6-flash-250828——
API providers5 (best)11
ReleasedAug 28, 2025Oct 15, 2025Aug 13, 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.

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

Which should you choose?

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

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

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. Seed 1.6 Flash has not been scored yet, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) has not been scored yet and Baichuan M2 32B has not been scored yet.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Seed 1.6 Flash, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) and Baichuan M2 32B 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: Seed 1.6 Flash up to 32,000, Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) up to 32,768, Baichuan M2 32B up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Seed 1.6 Flash accepts text, images and video; Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) accepts text and images; Baichuan M2 32B accepts text. 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; Seed 1.6 Flash and Qwen3 VL Flash (Alibaba Cloud) 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