ZMIME
Comparison · 3 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Seed 2.0 Code vs Qwen3.5 Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed

Qwen3.5 Flash comes out ahead, 79 to 57 and 41 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. ByteDance Seed

    Seed 2.0 Code

    Released Feb 14, 2026

    57/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.475 / $2.37
    • Context262K
  2. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.5 Flash

    Released Feb 23, 2026

    79/100
    • ECI144.0
    • Price$0.10 / $0.40
    • Context1M
  3. MiniMax

    MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed

    Released Feb 13, 2026

    41/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.60 / $2.40
    • Context205K
01 — Verdict

Qwen3.5 Flash is our pick

Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Seed 2.0 Code (57) and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (41). It leads on price 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 priceQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash $0.175 · Seed 2.0 Code $0.95 · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed $1.05 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextQwen3.5 FlashQwen3.5 Flash 1,000,000 · Seed 2.0 Code 262,144 · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed 204,800 tokens
  • Widest inputsSeed 2.0 Code and Qwen3.5 FlashSeed 2.0 Code: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.5 Flash: Text, Images, Video · MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed: Text
  • Self-hostingMiniMax-M2.5-highspeedPublishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightSeed 2.0 CodeQwen3.5 FlashMiniMax-M2.5-highspeed
Price50%518649
Inputs & features30%808035
Context window20%376032
Overall100%57/10079/10041/100

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 2.0 Code vs Qwen3.5 Flash vs MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed specifications side by side
SpecificationSeed 2.0 CodeByteDance SeedQwen3.5 FlashAlibaba (Qwen)MiniMax-M2.5-highspeedMiniMax
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)—144.0—
ECI rank—#82 of 148—
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions—82.3%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics—18.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics—84.4%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—20.3%—
Price per million tokens
Input$0.475$0.10 (best)$0.60
Output$2.37$0.40 (best)$2.40
Cached input$0.095$0.01 (best)$0.06
Blended (3:1)$0.95$0.175 (best)$1.05
Long-context rateOver 32K: $0.712 / $3.56Same rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Volcengine Ark APIOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial MiniMax (minimax.io) API
Limits
Context window262,144 tokens1,000,000 tokens (best)204,800 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)65,536 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYesYes
ImagesYesYesNo
PDFsNoNoNo
AudioNoNoNo
VideoYesYesNo
ReasoningYesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · maxYesYes
Tool callingYesYesYes
Structured outputYesYesNo
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietaryOpen
API model IDdoubao-seed-2-0-code-preview-260215qwen3.5-flashMiniMax-M2.5-highspeed
API providers10 (best)87
ReleasedFeb 14, 2026Feb 23, 2026Feb 13, 2026
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 2.0 Code$9.50
  • Qwen3.5 Flash$1.80
  • MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed$10.80
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Seed 2.0 Code, Qwen3.5 Flash or MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed?

Qwen3.5 Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 79/100 against Seed 2.0 Code (57) and MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (41). It leads on price 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, Qwen3.5 Flash or MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed?

Qwen3.5 Flash is cheaper at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Seed 2.0 Code costs $0.475 input / $2.37 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark 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 $0.175 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 Flash versus $0.95 for Seed 2.0 Code (5.4× as much) and $1.05 for MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed (6× 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, Qwen3.5 Flash has an ECI of 144.0 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, Qwen3.5 Flash 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?

Qwen3.5 Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Seed 2.0 Code and 204,800 for MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed. Maximum output per response: Seed 2.0 Code up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 Flash up to 65,536, 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; Qwen3.5 Flash accepts text, images and video; MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed accepts text. Seed 2.0 Code handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Code and Qwen3.5 Flash is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.5 Flash is the newest, released Feb 23, 2026. Seed 2.0 Code came out Feb 14, 2026; MiniMax-M2.5-highspeed came out Feb 13, 2026.

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.