Seed 2.0 Code vs Qwen3.5 Plus
Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen3.5 Plus 59, Seed 2.0 Code 57). The right pick depends on what you value most.
ByteDance SeedSeed 2.0 Code
57/100- ECI—
- Price$0.475 / $2.37
- Context262K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.5 Plus
59/100- ECI146.8
- Price$0.40 / $2.40
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3.5 Plus 59/100, Seed 2.0 Code 57/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.5 Plus on price and Qwen3.5 Plus for long inputs. 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 PlusQwen3.5 Plus $0.90 · Seed 2.0 Code $0.95 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3.5 PlusQwen3.5 Plus 1,000,000 · Seed 2.0 Code 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsSeed 2.0 Code: Text, Images, Video · Qwen3.5 Plus: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Seed 2.0 Code | Qwen3.5 Plus |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 51 | 52 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 37 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 57/100 | 59/100 |
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 | Qwen3.5 PlusAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 146.8 |
| ECI rank | — | #65 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 84.9% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 86.7% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 25.4% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.475 | $0.40 (best) |
| Output | $2.37 (best) | $2.40 |
| Cached input | $0.095 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.95 | $0.90 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Over 32K: $0.712 / $3.56 | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Volcengine Ark API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | doubao-seed-2-0-code-preview-260215 | qwen3.5-plus |
| API providers | 10 | 10 |
| Released | Feb 14, 2026 | Feb 16, 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
- Qwen3.5 Plus$8.80
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Seed 2.0 Code or Qwen3.5 Plus?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen3.5 Plus 59/100, Seed 2.0 Code 57/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Qwen3.5 Plus on price and Qwen3.5 Plus for long inputs. 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 or Qwen3.5 Plus?
Qwen3.5 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 input / $2.40 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). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.90 per million tokens for Qwen3.5 Plus versus $0.95 for Seed 2.0 Code (1.1× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Seed 2.0 Code has not been scored yet and Qwen3.5 Plus has an ECI of 146.8.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Seed 2.0 Code and Qwen3.5 Plus yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3.5 Plus has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 262,144 for Seed 2.0 Code. Maximum output per response: Seed 2.0 Code up to 131,072, Qwen3.5 Plus up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Seed 2.0 Code accepts text, images and video; Qwen3.5 Plus accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
No. Seed 2.0 Code and Qwen3.5 Plus are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.5 Plus is the newest, released Feb 16, 2026. Seed 2.0 Code came out Feb 14, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Qwen3.5 Plus 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.
Related comparisons
- Add MiniMax-M2.5-highspeedThree-way comparison
- Seed 2.0 Code vs MiniMax-M2.5-highspeedMiniMax
- Seed 2.0 Code vs DeepSeek OCR 2DeepSeek
- Seed 2.0 Code vs Qwen3.5 27BAlibaba (Qwen)
- Seed 2.0 Code vs Nova 2 LiteAmazon
- Qwen3.5 Plus vs MiniMax-M2.5MiniMax · ECI 146.7
- Qwen3.5 Plus vs Nemotron 3 Ultra 550B A55BNVIDIA · ECI 146.2
