Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) vs Seed-2.0-Lite

Side-by-side benchmark comparison across agentic, coding, multimodal, knowledge, reasoning, and math workflows.

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 75 to 63. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)'s sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 62.3 against 41.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 77 to 52. Seed-2.0-Lite does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) is the reasoning model in the pair, while Seed-2.0-Lite is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Seed-2.0-Lite gives you the larger context window at 256K, compared with 128K for Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning).

Quick Verdict

Pick Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Seed-2.0-Lite only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you need the larger 256K context window.

Agentic

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

74.8

Seed-2.0-Lite

55.1

77
Terminal-Bench 2.0
52
78
BrowseComp
63
70
OSWorld-Verified
53

Coding

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

62.3

Seed-2.0-Lite

41.4

83
HumanEval
63
60
SWE-bench Verified
45
60
LiveCodeBench
37
65
SWE-bench Pro
45

Multimodal & Grounded

Seed-2.0-Lite

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

70.8

Seed-2.0-Lite

79.6

64
MMMU-Pro
80
79
OfficeQA Pro
79

Reasoning

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

84.2

Seed-2.0-Lite

73

87
SimpleQA
68
85
MuSR
66
91
BBH
85
80
LongBench v2
76
82
MRCRv2
77

Knowledge

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

70.1

Seed-2.0-Lite

53.9

91
MMLU
71
89
GPQA
70
87
SuperGPQA
68
85
OpenBookQA
66
81
MMLU-Pro
73
29
HLE
7
81
FrontierScience
66

Instruction Following

Tie

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

89

Seed-2.0-Lite

89

89
IFEval
89

Multilingual

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

87.8

Seed-2.0-Lite

82.5

91
MGSM
87
86
MMLU-ProX
80

Mathematics

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning)

92.5

Seed-2.0-Lite

75

93
AIME 2023
71
95
AIME 2024
73
94
AIME 2025
72
89
HMMT Feb 2023
67
91
HMMT Feb 2024
69
90
HMMT Feb 2025
68
92
BRUMO 2025
70
93
MATH-500
81

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) is ahead overall, 75 to 63. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 77 and 52.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 70.1 versus 53.9. Inside this category, HLE is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 62.3 versus 41.4. Inside this category, LiveCodeBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.5 versus 75. Inside this category, AIME 2023 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for reasoning, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 84.2 versus 73. Inside this category, SimpleQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 74.8 versus 55.1. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Seed-2.0-Lite has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 79.6 versus 70.8. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for instruction following, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) and Seed-2.0-Lite are effectively tied for instruction following here, both landing at 89 on average.

Which is better for multilingual tasks, Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) or Seed-2.0-Lite?

Qwen3.5 397B (Reasoning) has the edge for multilingual tasks in this comparison, averaging 87.8 versus 82.5. Inside this category, MMLU-ProX is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Last updated: March 12, 2026

Weekly LLM Benchmark Digest

Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.