Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Seed-2.0-Code vs Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs 3.0x less per output token than Seed-2.0-Code ($1.00 vs $3.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; no benchmark has tested both models yet.

Seed-2.0-CodeByteDance Seed
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$3.00
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingQwen
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.00
vs $3.00 vs $1.00 per 1M output tokens. Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking is 3.0x cheaper.

Seed-2.0-Code or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking: which to pick

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

Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

No benchmark has tested both yet. Seed-2.0-Code has none yet; Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking on AA Intelligence Index. Compare them on price and context instead.

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-2.0-Code not benchmarked, Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking 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-2.0-Code $3.00 against Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking $1.00 per million output tokens, 3.0x 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.

IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board measured
Intelligence benchmarks for Seed-2.0-Code and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
BenchmarkSeed-2.0-CodeQwen3 VL 30B A3B ThinkingLeader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured9.5Only Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board 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$0.0020Fits in one request
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking$0.0008Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Seed-2.0-Code$0.034Fits in one request
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking$0.018Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Seed-2.0-Code$0.130Fits in one request
Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking$0.068Fits in one request

Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking 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-2.0-Code and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
SpecificationByteDance Seed Seed-2.0-CodeQwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking
MakerByteDance SeedQwen
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 12, 2026October 6, 2025
Context window262K262K
Input $/Mtok$0.50$0.29
Output $/Mtok$3.00$1.00
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Seed-2.0-Code better than Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Compare them on price, context and the boards below.

Which is cheaper, Seed-2.0-Code or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

Seed-2.0-Code costs $0.50 per million input tokens and $3.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking costs $0.29 and $1.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Seed-2.0-Code or Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

Neither: both take 262K tokens.

Has any benchmark tested both Seed-2.0-Code and Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking?

No benchmark has tested both yet. Seed-2.0-Code has none yet; Qwen3 VL 30B A3B Thinking on AA Intelligence Index. Compare them on price and context instead. Data as of October 22, 2026.

Compare next