Seed 1.6 Flash vs Trinity Mini vs Trinity Nano Preview
Seed 1.6 Flash comes out ahead, 56 to 31 and 25 on our weighted score.
- Our pick
ByteDance SeedSeed 1.6 Flash
56/100- ECI—
- Price$0.022 / $0.223
- Context256K
Arcee AITrinity Mini
31/100- ECI—
- Price$0.045 / $0.15
- Context131K
- Arcee AI
Trinity Nano Preview
25/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context131K
Seed 1.6 Flash is our pick
Seed 1.6 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 56/100 against Trinity Mini (31) and Trinity Nano Preview (25). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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 priceTrinity MiniTrinity Mini $0.071 · Seed 1.6 Flash $0.072 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Trinity Nano Preview unpriced
- Longest contextSeed 1.6 FlashSeed 1.6 Flash 256,000 · Trinity Mini 131,072 · Trinity Nano Preview 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsSeed 1.6 FlashSeed 1.6 Flash: Text, Images · Trinity Mini: Text · Trinity Nano Preview: Text
- Self-hostingTrinity Mini and Trinity Nano PreviewPublishes downloadable weights (OpenMDW-1.1)
| Measure | Weight | Seed 1.6 Flash | Trinity Mini | Trinity Nano Preview |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 70 | 35 | 25 |
| Context window | 40% | 36 | 24 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 56/100 | 31/100 | 25/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Seed 1.6 FlashByteDance Seed | Trinity MiniArcee AI | Trinity Nano PreviewArcee AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.022 (best) | $0.045 | — |
| Output | $0.223 | $0.15 (best) | — |
| Cached input | $0.0044 | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.072 | $0.071 (best) | — |
| Long-context rate | Over 32K: $0.045 / $0.445 | Same rate | — |
| Price source | Official Volcengine Ark API | Median of 1 providers | — |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 256,000 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 32,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 |
| API model ID | doubao-seed-1-6-flash-250828 | — | — |
| API providers | 2 (best) | 1 | — |
| Released | Aug 28, 2025 | Dec 1, 2025 | Dec 1, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | — |
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
- Trinity Mini$0.75
- Trinity Nano Preview—
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Seed 1.6 Flash, Trinity Mini or Trinity Nano Preview?
Seed 1.6 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 56/100 against Trinity Mini (31) and Trinity Nano Preview (25). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. 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, Trinity Mini or Trinity Nano Preview?
Trinity Mini is cheaper at $0.045 input / $0.15 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 $0.071 per million tokens for Trinity Mini versus $0.072 for Seed 1.6 Flash (1× as much). Trinity Nano Preview has no published per-token price.
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, Trinity Mini has not been scored yet and Trinity Nano Preview has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Seed 1.6 Flash, Trinity Mini and Trinity Nano Preview 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?
Seed 1.6 Flash has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Trinity Mini and 131,072 for Trinity Nano Preview. Maximum output per response: Seed 1.6 Flash up to 32,000, Trinity Mini up to 131,072, Trinity Nano Preview up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Seed 1.6 Flash accepts text and images; Trinity Mini accepts text; Trinity Nano Preview accepts text. Seed 1.6 Flash handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Trinity Mini and Trinity Nano Preview publishes its weights (OpenMDW-1.1) and can be self-hosted; Seed 1.6 Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Trinity Mini is the newest, released Dec 1, 2025. Trinity Nano Preview came out Dec 1, 2025; Seed 1.6 Flash came out Aug 28, 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.
