Seed-2.0-Code vs o4 Mini High
Updated October 21, 2026. 0 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $3.00
- Coding
- No data
- Overall
- No data
- Output $/M
- $4.40
Decision reading
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Seed-2.0-Code has the edge where output tokens cost 1.5x less, and where the context window is larger, 262K against 200K tokens.
- Shared results
- 0
- Seed-2.0-Code only
- 0
- o4 Mini High only
- 2
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 of 9
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.
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.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Long documents
Listed context window
Seed-2.0-Code
Seed-2.0-Code takes 262K tokens against 200K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Seed-2.0-Code
Seed-2.0-Code $0.0020, o4 Mini High $0.0033 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Seed-2.0-Code not benchmarked, o4 Mini High not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- No category has a result for both models.
- Widest single gap
- No benchmark has a result for both models.
- Output price
- Seed-2.0-Code $3.00 against o4 Mini High $4.40 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
- Context window
- Seed-2.0-Code takes 262K tokens, o4 Mini High 200K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 826.2 | Only o4 Mini High measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 37 boards here | |||
IntelligenceNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 2 boards here | |||
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GDPval | Not measured | 25.3% | Only o4 Mini High measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 21 boards here | |||
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 13 boards here | |||
KnowledgeNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 17 boards here | |||
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 9 boards here | |||
GeneralNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 46 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Seed-2.0-Code | o4 Mini High | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
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-2.0-Code costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Seed-2.0-Code costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Seed-2.0-Code 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.
| Specification | ByteDance Seed Seed-2.0-Code | OpenAI o4 Mini High |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | ByteDance Seed | OpenAI |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | August 12, 2026 | April 16, 2025 |
| Context window | 262K | 200K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.50 | $1.10 |
| Output $/Mtok | $3.00 | $4.40 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Seed-2.0-Code better than o4 Mini High for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Seed-2.0-Code has the edge where output tokens cost 1.5x less, and where the context window is larger, 262K against 200K tokens.
Which is cheaper, Seed-2.0-Code or o4 Mini High?
Seed-2.0-Code costs $0.50 per million input tokens and $3.00 per million output tokens; o4 Mini High costs $1.10 and $4.40. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Seed-2.0-Code or o4 Mini High?
Seed-2.0-Code, with 262K tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks is the Seed-2.0-Code vs o4 Mini High comparison based on?
0 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Seed-2.0-Code's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and o4 Mini High's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.