Seed 2.0 Lite vs Sarvam 105B
Seed 2.0 Lite comes out ahead, 73 to 65 on our weighted score, though Sarvam 105B is 2.4× cheaper per token.
- Our pick
ByteDance SeedSeed 2.0 Lite
73/100- ECI—
- Price$0.089 / $0.534
- Context256K
Sarvam AI
Sarvam 105B
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.047 / $0.186
- Context131K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Seed 2.0 Lite is our pick
Seed 2.0 Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Sarvam 105B (65). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Sarvam 105B wins on price. 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 priceSarvam 105BSarvam 105B $0.082 · Seed 2.0 Lite $0.20 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextSeed 2.0 LiteSeed 2.0 Lite 256,000 · Sarvam 105B 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsSeed 2.0 LiteSeed 2.0 Lite: Text, Images, Video · Sarvam 105B: Text
- Self-hostingSarvam 105BPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Seed 2.0 Lite | Sarvam 105B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 83 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 36 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 73/100 | 65/100 |
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 LiteByteDance Seed | Sarvam 105BSarvam AI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.089 | $0.047 (best) |
| Output | $0.534 | $0.186 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.018 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.20 | $0.082 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Over 32K: $0.134 / $0.802 | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Volcengine Ark API | Median of 2 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 256,000 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 32,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yes · low · medium · high |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | doubao-seed-2-0-lite-260428 | sarvam-105b |
| API providers | 6 (best) | 3 |
| Released | Feb 14, 2026 | Sep 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 2.0 Lite$1.96
- Sarvam 105B$0.842
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Seed 2.0 Lite or Sarvam 105B?
Seed 2.0 Lite is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Sarvam 105B (65). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Sarvam 105B wins on price. 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 Lite or Sarvam 105B?
Sarvam 105B is cheaper at $0.047 input / $0.186 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). Seed 2.0 Lite costs $0.089 input / $0.534 output per million tokens (official Volcengine Ark API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.082 per million tokens for Sarvam 105B versus $0.20 for Seed 2.0 Lite (2.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Seed 2.0 Lite has not been scored yet and Sarvam 105B has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Seed 2.0 Lite and Sarvam 105B 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?
Seed 2.0 Lite has the largest context window at 256,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Sarvam 105B. Maximum output per response: Seed 2.0 Lite up to 32,000, Sarvam 105B up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Seed 2.0 Lite accepts text, images and video; Sarvam 105B accepts text. Seed 2.0 Lite handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Sarvam 105B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Seed 2.0 Lite is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Seed 2.0 Lite is the newest, released Feb 14, 2026. Sarvam 105B came out Sep 1, 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.
