Seed 2.0 Code vs GLM-4.7 vs MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed
Seed 2.0 Code comes out ahead, 57 to 42 and 41 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
ByteDance SeedSeed 2.0 Code
57/100- ECI—
- Price$0.475 / $2.37
- Context262K
Z.ai (Zhipu)GLM-4.7
42/100- ECI143.5
- Price$0.60 / $2.20
- Context205K
MiniMaxMiniMax-M2.5-highspeed
41/100- ECI—
- Price$0.60 / $2.40
- Context205K
Seed 2.0 Code is our pick
Seed 2.0 Code is the better all-round choice, scoring 57/100 against GLM-4.7 (42) and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (41). It leads on inputs & features and 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 priceSeed 2.0 CodeSeed 2.0 Code $0.95 · GLM-4.7 $1.00 · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed $1.05 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextSeed 2.0 CodeSeed 2.0 Code 262,144 · GLM-4.7 204,800 · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 204,800 tokens
- Widest inputsSeed 2.0 CodeSeed 2.0 Code: Text, Images, Video · GLM-4.7: Text · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed: Text
- Self-hostingGLM-4.7 and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeedPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Seed 2.0 Code | GLM-4.7 | MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 51 | 50 | 49 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 32 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 57/100 | 42/100 | 41/100 |
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 | Seed 2.0 CodeByteDance Seed | GLM-4.7Z.ai (Zhipu) | MiniMax-M2.5-highspeedMiniMax |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 143.5 | — |
| ECI rank | — | #84 of 148 | — |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 83.3% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 83.3% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 32.2% | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.475 (best) | $0.60 | $0.60 |
| Output | $2.37 | $2.20 (best) | $2.40 |
| Cached input | $0.095 | $0.11 | $0.06 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.95 (best) | $1.00 | $1.05 |
| Long-context rate | Over 32K: $0.712 / $3.56 | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Volcengine Ark API | Official Z.AI API | Official MiniMax (minimax.io) API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens (best) | 204,800 tokens | 204,800 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open | Open |
| API model ID | doubao-seed-2-0-code-preview-260215 | glm-4.7 | MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed |
| API providers | 10 | 20 (best) | 7 |
| Released | Feb 14, 2026 | Dec 22, 2025 | Feb 13, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Apr 2025 | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Seed 2.0 Code$9.50
- GLM-4.7$10.40
- MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed$10.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Seed 2.0 Code, GLM-4.7 or MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed?
Seed 2.0 Code is the better all-round choice, scoring 57/100 against GLM-4.7 (42) and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (41). It leads on inputs & features and 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, Seed 2.0 Code, GLM-4.7 or MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed?
Seed 2.0 Code is cheaper at $0.475 input / $2.37 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). GLM-4.7 costs $0.60 input / $2.20 output per million tokens (official Z.AI API price); MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed costs $0.60 input / $2.40 output per million tokens (official MiniMax (minimax.io) API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.95 per million tokens for Seed 2.0 Code versus $1.00 for GLM-4.7 (1.1× as much) and $1.05 for MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Seed 2.0 Code has not been scored yet, GLM-4.7 has an ECI of 143.5 and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Seed 2.0 Code, GLM-4.7 and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 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 2.0 Code has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 204,800 for GLM-4.7 and 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed. Maximum output per response: Seed 2.0 Code up to 131,072, GLM-4.7 up to 131,072, MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Seed 2.0 Code accepts text, images and video; GLM-4.7 accepts text; MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed accepts text. Seed 2.0 Code handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
GLM-4.7 and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Code is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Seed 2.0 Code is the newest, released Feb 14, 2026. MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed came out Feb 13, 2026; GLM-4.7 came out Dec 22, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: GLM-4.7 Apr 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.
