Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs GPT-6 Astra
Full profiles: Dola Seed 2.0 Pro (ByteDance) and GPT-6 Astra (OpenAI): every benchmark, price and rank.
Updated · Data from 11 sources
As of 9 Nov 2026, GPT-6 Astra is ahead of Dola Seed 2.0 Pro on quality (68.1 vs 58.5 on the BenchLeader Index). GPT-6 Astra leads in every category we measure both in.
Key facts (as of 9 Nov 2026)
- Dola Seed 2.0 Pro scores 58.5 on the BenchLeader Index and GPT-6 Astra scores 68.1 (BenchLeader, 9 Nov 2026).
- GPT-6 Astra costs $20.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 9 Nov 2026).
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro benchmarks 
GPT-6 Astra benchmarks Which to pick for…
The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.
| Use case | Pick | Why | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | GPT-6 Astra | 83 vs 65 category score | High |
| Maths | GPT-6 Astra | 78 vs 63 category score | High |
| Reasoning | GPT-6 Astra | 86 vs 64 category score | High |
| Chat quality (human preference) | – | Only Dola Seed 2.0 Pro has an Arena rating (64 category score) | Not comparable |
| High volume on a budget | Neither flagship | A smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs | – |
Key differences
- GPT-6 Astra leads on quality: 68.1 vs 58.5.
- Dola Seed 2.0 Pro is stronger in human preference, multimodal.
- GPT-6 Astra is stronger in coding, maths, reasoning, agents & tools, composite, knowledge.
At a glance
| Spec | Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | ByteDance | OpenAI |
| Released | 14 Feb 2026 | 2 Sep 2026 |
| Context window (tokens) | – | 1,050,000 |
| Compared at | Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra |
| Open weights | No | No |
| Price in / out / cached input per 1M | – | $10.00 / $50.00 / $1.00 |
Category by category
Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.
| Category | Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 64.4 | 85.6 | GPT-6 Astra |
| Coding | 65.0 | 83.2 | GPT-6 Astra |
| Agents & tools | – | 69.2 | not comparable |
| Maths | 62.8 | 77.9 | GPT-6 Astra |
| Knowledge | – | 56.1 | not comparable |
| Human preference | 64.2 | – | not comparable |
| Multimodal | 61.3 | – | not comparable |
| Composite | – | 72.6 | not comparable |
On one chart
Each domain on the index's own scale, where 50 is an average model. Click a domain to see the benchmarks behind it. Pick up to 5 models from the list.
Not drawn, measured for fewer than two of these models: Agents & tools, Knowledge, Instruction following, Long context, Multimodal, Human preference.
Where sources disagree
Across the 0 benchmarks both have, Dola Seed 2.0 Pro leads 0, GPT-6 Astra leads 0. Every overall index that rates both puts GPT-6 Astra ahead.
| Overall index | Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 58.5 | 68.1 | GPT-6 Astra |
| Arena Text | 1457 | 1475† | GPT-6 Astra |
Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).
Price, speed and latency
List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page. Cost, tokens and time per benchmark task are measured: Artificial Analysis’ averages over its whole Intelligence Index run.
| Measure | Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra |
|---|---|---|
| Blended price per 1M tokens | – | $20.00 |
| Input / output per 1M | – / – | $10.00 / $50.00 |
| Cached input per 1M | – | $1.00 |
| Price per task: chat reply | – | $0.019 |
| Price per task: summarize a 30-page report | – | $0.150 |
| Price per task: code edit | – | $0.135 |
| Price per task: agentic coding session | – | $0.800 |
| Price per task: structured extraction | – | $0.030 |
| Agentic coding session, input mostly cached | – | $0.395 |
| Output speed | – | 27 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | – | 4.8 s |
Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Dola Seed 2.0 Pro scores 58.5. GPT-6 Astra scores 68.1 and takes 5 s to its first answer token; GPT-6 Astra (max) scores 67.4 in 232 s, GPT-6 Astra (high) scores 66.5 in 64 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.
Every benchmark
143 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.
| Metric | Publisher | Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | BenchLeader | 58.5 | 68.1 |
| Coding score | BenchLeader | 65.0 | 83.2 |
| Human preference score | BenchLeader | 64.2 | – |
| Maths score | BenchLeader | 62.8 | 77.9 |
| Multimodal score | BenchLeader | 61.3 | – |
| Reasoning score | BenchLeader | 64.4 | 85.6 |
| Agents & tools score | BenchLeader | – | 69.2 |
| Composite score | BenchLeader | – | 72.6 |
| Knowledge score | BenchLeader | – | 56.1 |
| Blended price $/M | BenchLeader | – | $20.00 |
| Output speed | BenchLeader | – | 27 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | BenchLeader | – | 4.8 s |
| Context window | BenchLeader | – | 1,050,000 tokens |
| Reasoning | |||
| GPQA Diamond | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 95.8%† |
| Humanity's Last Exam | Scale AI / CAIS | – | 54.8% |
| Arena Hard Prompts | Arena (LMArena) | 1481 | 1500† |
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoning | LiveBench | – | 92.7% |
| LiveBench 1.0 Reasoning | LiveBench | – | 92.7%† |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 96.1%† |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 54.7%† |
| HLE-Diamond (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 63.8%† |
| ARC-AGI-1 | ARC Prize | – | 97.5%† |
| ARC-AGI-2 | ARC Prize | – | 95.0%† |
| ARC-AGI-3 | ARC Prize | – | 98.6%† |
| CritPt | Artificial Analysis | – | 31.7%† |
| CritPt v2 hard subset (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 70.5%† |
| MysteryMechanism | Vals AI | – | 53.1%† |
| Chess Puzzles | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 74.0%† |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 84.0%† |
| LMCA | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 64.1% |
| DTBench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 97.1% |
| BTF-3 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 13.5%† |
| Coding | |||
| SciCode | SciCode | – | 56.5%† |
| WeirdML | WeirdML | – | 93.3%† |
| FrontierCode | Cognition | – | 53.3%† |
| GSO-Bench | GSO-Bench | – | 79.4% |
| Arena Coding | Arena (LMArena) | 1514 | 1548† |
| Arena WebDev | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1767† |
Show all 143 benchmarks
| Metric | Publisher | Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | |||
| LiveBench 2.0 Coding | LiveBench | – | 87.5% |
| LiveBench 1.0 Coding | LiveBench | – | 80.4%† |
| IOI | Vals AI | – | 100.0%† |
| Code Migration | Vals AI | – | 67.7%† |
| Code Migration v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 80.6%† |
| ProgramBench | Vals AI | – | 5.5%† |
| SWE-bench Multimodal | Vals AI | – | 43.3%† |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 | Vals AI | – | 27.6%† |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 89.6%† |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA | Scale AI SEAL | – | 59.1%† |
| SWE Atlas: Refactoring | Scale AI SEAL | – | 59.0%† |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writing | Scale AI SEAL | – | 50.7%† |
| MirrorCode | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 46.7%† |
| DeepSWE v1.1 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 73.2%† |
| ALE-Bench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 2951.3† |
| FrontierSWE | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 65.5%† |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 59.1%† |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 88.4%† |
| Startrise Frontend | Startrise | – | 79.9% |
| GameBench 2 Overall | DuelLab GameBench 2 | – | 88.7 |
| GameBench 2 by reasoning setting | DuelLab GameBench 2 | – | 94.0† |
| Design Arena Website | Design Arena | – | 1333† |
| FrontierCode 1.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 47.0%† |
| FrontierCode 2.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 42.4%† |
| Agents & tools | |||
| Terminal-Bench | Terminal-Bench | – | 60.3%† |
| Remote Labor Index | Scale AI / CAIS | – | 20.8% |
| APEX-Agents | Mercor | – | 64.7% |
| Arena Agent | Arena (LMArena) | – | 14.2† |
| LiveBench Long Agentic | LiveBench | – | 75.6% |
| LiveBench Browser | LiveBench | – | 91.3% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | LiveBench | – | 57.3%† |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | Vals AI | – | 87.3%† |
| HiL-Bench | Scale AI SEAL | – | 65.3% |
| GDPval-AA v2.1, normalised score | Artificial Analysis | – | 53.7%† |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 1584† |
| τ³-Banking (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 41.4%† |
| ITBench SRE (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 48.6%† |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 51.3%† |
| CUA-bench | Vals AI | – | 19.2%† |
| CyberBench | Vals AI | – | 41.1%† |
| Finance Agent v2 | Vals AI | – | 53.5%† |
| Finance Agent v2.1 | Vals AI | – | 60.4%† |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 7.1%† |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1 | Vals AI | – | 5.4%† |
| Legal Research Bench | Vals AI | – | 39.4%† |
| Robo-bench | Vals AI | – | 23.3%† |
| SREBench | Vals AI | – | 56.9%† |
| Tax Agent Bench | Vals AI | – | 20.7%† |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | Vals AI | – | 59.6%† |
| Terminal-Bench Science | Vals AI | – | 62.9%† |
| Time Horizon Index: KSP | Vals AI | – | 90.5%† |
| Arena Search | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1245† |
| BALROG | BALROG | – | 68.3%† |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Andon Labs | – | 15514.7 |
| AutomationBench | Artificial Analysis | – | 68.5%† |
| GDP.pdf (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 31.0%† |
| Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 | Harvey | – | 8.6%† |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 1569† |
| GDPx | GDPx by SemiAnalysis | – | 9.6%† |
| Design Arena Agentic | Design Arena | – | 1393† |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 63.3%† |
| CWE-Bench (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 63.3%† |
| DeepSec-Bench (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 36.9%† |
| CyberGym end-to-end (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 0.0%† |
| FACTS Search | – | 93.3% | |
| Maths | |||
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 93.7%† |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 97.6%† |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 100.0%† |
| ProofBench | Vals AI | – | 99.0% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | LiveBench | – | 96.8%† |
| Arena Maths | Arena (LMArena) | 1449 | 1481† |
| Knowledge | |||
| SimpleQA Verified | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 75.6%† |
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysis | LiveBench | – | 83.0% |
| LiveBench Research | LiveBench | – | 90.6% |
| LiveBench 1.0 Data Analysis | LiveBench | – | 83.0%† |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 42.4† |
| PRBench Finance | Scale AI SEAL | – | 47.5% |
| PRBench Legal | Scale AI SEAL | – | 48.4% |
| BioMysteryBench | Vals AI | – | 79.3%† |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | Vals AI | – | 71.7%† |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 72.7%† |
| MedCode | Vals AI | – | 48.5%† |
| MedScribe | Vals AI | – | 87.9%† |
| DrugDiscoveryBench | Scale AI SEAL | – | 68.7%† |
| EBR-bench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 76.2%† |
| GDP.pdf | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 34.2%† |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracy | Artificial Analysis | – | 61.6%† |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucination | Artificial Analysis | – | 50.2%† |
| HealthBench Professional (AA) | OpenAI | – | 66.0%† |
| Instruction following | |||
| LiveBench Language | LiveBench | – | 89.4%† |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | LiveBench | – | 75.6%† |
| Arena Instruction Following | Arena (LMArena) | 1435 | 1473† |
| Human preference | |||
| Arena Text | Arena (LMArena) | 1457 | 1475† |
| Arena Creative Writing | Arena (LMArena) | 1403 | 1450† |
| Arena Multi-turn | Arena (LMArena) | 1449 | 1483† |
| Arena Longer Queries | Arena (LMArena) | 1453 | 1486† |
| Multimodal | |||
| Arena Vision | Arena (LMArena) | 1274 | 1279† |
| LiveBench Design | LiveBench | – | 80.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | Artificial Analysis | – | 86.9%† |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 49.7% |
| Code2Video-AA | Artificial Analysis | – | 1427† |
| AA-3D | Artificial Analysis | – | 1168† |
| Long context | |||
| AA-LCR v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 80.7%† |
| Arena Document | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1473† |
| MLCR | Artificial Analysis | – | 41.7%† |
| Composite | |||
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 169.1 |
| LiveBench 2.0 | LiveBench | – | 84.5% |
| LiveBench 1.0 | LiveBench | – | 82.2%† |
| AA Intelligence Index v5.0 | Artificial Analysis | – | 56.9† |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | Artificial Analysis | – | 52.7† |
| AA Progress Index v1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 349.6† |
| Vals Index | Vals AI | – | 65.0† |
| Vals Finance Index | Vals AI | – | 55.6%† |
| Vals RSI Index | Vals AI | – | 27.1%† |
| Vals Science Index | Vals AI | – | 65.1%† |
| Vals Router Index | Vals AI | – | 65.0% |
| AA Cyber Index | Artificial Analysis | – | 33.4† |
| Safety & honesty | |||
| FORTRESS | Scale AI SEAL | – | 12.1% |
Data as of 2026-11-09. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
DuelLab GameBench 2, release gb2-20261103-eaea31df94e6 (https://benchmarks.duellab.org/releases/gb2-20261103-eaea31df94e6/), CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Scores mapped to BenchLeader model names; not endorsed by DuelLab.
What changed
- GPT-6 Astra: 5 score revisions.
- GPT-6 Astra: 1 score revision.
- GPT-6 Astra: 1 new result (FORTRESS); 1 score revision.
- GPT-6 Astra: 1 score revision.
- GPT-6 Astra: 3 score revisions.
- GPT-6 Astra: 1 new result (Vals Router Index).
- GPT-6 Astra: 1 score revision.
- GPT-6 Astra: 8 new results (LiveBench 2.0, LiveBench Long Agentic, LiveBench 2.0 Reasoning…).
- Dola Seed 2.0 Pro: BenchLeader Index 59.1 → 58.6.
- GPT-6 Astra: 1 new result (Startrise Frontend).
Related comparisons
- Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs Claude Fable 5.2
- Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Fable 5.2
- GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-6 Astra vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- GPT-6 Astra vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs GPT-6.1 Sol
Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs GPT-6 Astra: questions
- Is GPT-6 Astra better than Dola Seed 2.0 Pro?
- GPT-6 Astra leads on quality: 68.1 vs 58.5. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; GPT-6 Astra is ahead overall as of 9 Nov 2026, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Dola Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-6 Astra better for coding?
- GPT-6 Astra scores higher in coding (83 vs 65 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- When was GPT-6 Astra released?
- GPT-6 Astra was released on 2 Sep 2026.