Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Seed 1.6 Flash vs Ternary Bonsai 2 27B

Seed 1.6 Flash costs 1.7x less per output token than Ternary Bonsai 2 27B ($0.30 vs $0.50 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Seed 1.6 FlashByteDance Seed
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.30
P Ternary Bonsai 2 27BPrism-ml
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.50
vs $0.30 vs $0.50 per 1M output tokens. Seed 1.6 Flash is 1.7x cheaper.

Seed 1.6 Flash or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Seed 1.6 Flash for output tokens 1.7x cheaper ($0.30 vs $0.50 per million).

No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Seed 1.6 Flash not benchmarked, Ternary Bonsai 2 27B not benchmarked.
Widest category
None yet: no category has been tested on both models.
Widest single gap
None yet: no benchmark has tested both models.
Output price
Seed 1.6 Flash $0.30 against Ternary Bonsai 2 27B $0.50 per million output tokens, 1.7x apart.
Context window
Both take 262K tokens.

Benchmark by benchmark

Every board either model has a result on, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale. Only one model is measured on each, so no row names a leader.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Seed 1.6 Flash$0.0002Fits in one request
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B$0.0003Fits in one request

Seed 1.6 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Seed 1.6 Flash$0.0046Fits in one request
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B$0.0053Fits in one request

Seed 1.6 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Seed 1.6 Flash$0.018Fits in one request
Ternary Bonsai 2 27B$0.020Fits in one request

Seed 1.6 Flash costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Seed 1.6 Flash and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
SpecificationByteDance Seed Seed 1.6 FlashPrismML Ternary Bonsai 2 27B
MakerByteDance SeedPrism-ml
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedDecember 23, 2025September 18, 2026
Context window262K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.075$0.075
Output $/Mtok$0.30$0.50
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Seed 1.6 Flash better than Ternary Bonsai 2 27B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Seed 1.6 Flash for output tokens 1.7x cheaper ($0.30 vs $0.50 per million).

Which is cheaper, Seed 1.6 Flash or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

Seed 1.6 Flash costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.30 per million output tokens; Ternary Bonsai 2 27B costs $0.075 and $0.50. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Seed 1.6 Flash or Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

Neither: both take 262K tokens.

Has any benchmark tested both Seed 1.6 Flash and Ternary Bonsai 2 27B?

No benchmark has tested either model yet, so price and context are the only way to compare them. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next