MModelspectraIndependent AI Model Intelligence
Head-to-head · Updated 2026-09-08
Model Comparison · Head to Head

DeepSeek-V4-Pro vs Doubao Seed Evolving

DeepSeek-V4-Pro wins on Overall, Coding; Doubao Seed Evolving wins on Multimodal. Every numeric field is compared below, with a worked monthly-cost example and a pick rule for each use case.

VendorDeepSeek / ByteDance
Data fields15+ dimensions
Updated2026-09-08
Read~9 min
01

Verdict at a glance

Bottom line: Choose DeepSeek-V4-Pro when coding depth, long-context reliability, lower refusal matter most; choose Doubao Seed Evolving when its stronger dimensions is the priority.

Choose DeepSeek-V4-Pro if you…

  • Strongest open source
  • Value champion
  • Excellent math reasoning
  • Extremely low price
  • Best for: Coding, Math reasoning, Open-source deployment

Choose Doubao Seed Evolving if you…

  • Continuously updated
  • 1M context
  • Good Chinese
  • ByteDance ecosystem
  • Best for: Chinese, Long context, Continuously evolving
02

Head-to-head aggregate scores

Scores are 0–100, aggregated from public benchmark information and independently weighted across three leaderboards. Rank is out of 22 tracked models.

DeepSeek-V4-Pro Higher overall
DeepSeek · #8 overall
Overall77
Coding79
Multimodal77
VS
Doubao Seed Evolving
ByteDance · #15 overall
Overall68
Coding67
Multimodal83

Aggregated from public sources and independently weighted; methodology on the Terms page. Scores within 3 points are treated as statistically tied.

03

Specs & pricing — every field side by side

List API prices in USD per 1M tokens. The highlighted cell is the stronger value/capability on that row.

DimensionDeepSeek-V4-ProDoubao Seed EvolvingVerdict
VendorDeepSeek (CN)ByteDance (CN)Different vendors
Released2026.042026.07Doubao Seed Evolving is newer
Overall (rank)77 · #868 · #15DeepSeek-V4-Pro +9
Coding79 · #567 · #14DeepSeek-V4-Pro +12
Multimodal77 · #1383 · #9Doubao Seed Evolving +6
Context window1M1MTie
Max output128K256KDoubao Seed Evolving longer
Effective-context9492DeepSeek-V4-Pro more reliable
Input $/1M$0.44$0.83DeepSeek-V4-Pro cheaper
Output $/1M$1.32$4.17DeepSeek-V4-Pro cheaper
Cache discountnonecustomDoubao Seed Evolving deeper
Speed~70 tok/s~60 tok/sDeepSeek-V4-Pro faster
TTFT0.5s0.5sTie
Function calling8282Tie
Refusal rate~5%~10%DeepSeek-V4-Pro less restrictive
English8270DeepSeek-V4-Pro
Chinese8593Doubao Seed Evolving
Modalitiestexttext, imagedifferent coverage
Open weightsYesNoDeepSeek-V4-Pro is open
Fine-tuningYesNo
Free tierDeepSeek App free; new API users receive creditsDoubao App free
SOC2 / no-trainno / yesno / yes
Private deploymentYesYesBoth support it

Fields drawn from vendor public documentation and the Modelspectra 22-model dataset; speed varies with network, concurrency and prompt length. Verify current pricing before purchase.

04

Dimension-by-dimension analysis

Reasoning & overall intelligence

DeepSeek-V4-Pro leads the overall aggregate by 9 points (77 vs 68). That is a meaningful, not marginal, edge on hard, multi-step reasoning, while Doubao Seed Evolving remains a strong generalist that is not out of its depth on routine work.

Agentic coding

This is a clear gap: DeepSeek-V4-Pro scores 79 against 67. On multi-file edits, SWE-style tickets and long-horizon agent loops DeepSeek-V4-Pro needs fewer correction turns; Doubao Seed Evolving is still competent for scripts and assisted completion but trails as task complexity rises.

Multimodal

Doubao Seed Evolving leads multimodal 83 vs 77. A concrete modality difference: Doubao Seed Evolving additionally handles image. Neither emits native video, so the comparison is about parsing images and documents, not generation.

Speed & latency

DeepSeek-V4-Pro is faster in interactive use: ~70 tok/s with 0.5s TTFT versus ~60 tok/s with 0.5s TTFT (about 1.2× the throughput). For conversational UIs where perceived responsiveness drives retention, that edge is a real product factor even when raw reasoning is lower.

Context: window vs usable recall

Nominal windows are 1M for DeepSeek-V4-Pro and 1M for Doubao Seed Evolving. Effective-context scores point the same way as window size — DeepSeek-V4-Pro is ahead on usable recall (94 vs 92), so prefer it for long-document work where details cannot be missed.

Price & total cost

DeepSeek-V4-Pro is the cheaper API at $0.44/$1.32 versus Doubao Seed Evolving at $0.83/$4.17 per 1M input/output tokens — list input is about 1.9× lower.

Chinese vs English

English: DeepSeek-V4-Pro 82 vs Doubao Seed Evolving 70. Chinese: 85 vs 93. For Chinese-language production, Doubao Seed Evolving is the stronger pick. Note that non-Chinese models generally require overseas network access for their APIs.

Tool use & ecosystem

Function-calling score: DeepSeek-V4-Pro 82 vs Doubao Seed Evolving 82, so DeepSeek-V4-Pro has the edge on structured tool use. Fine-tuning is available from DeepSeek-V4-Pro. Factor in existing SDK/plugin familiarity — switching cost often outweighs a few-point tool-use gap.

05

Cost worked example — same workload, real token math

Assume a production workload of 100M input + 30M output tokens per month, with 90% of input tokens served from cache. Figures use public list prices.

Scenario · per monthDeepSeek-V4-ProDoubao Seed EvolvingGap
List priceno cache applied$84100M in × $0.44  +  30M out × $1.32$208100M in × $0.83  +  30M out × $4.172.48×gap
With caching90% of inputs cache-hit$84no published cache discount$208no published cache discount2.48×gap

Illustrative model; your input/output mix and cache-hit ratio change the result. Prices are list rates before any enterprise agreement.

06

Decision tree

IF the workload is agentic or multi-file coding and a wrong first pass is expensive  →  choose DeepSeek-V4-Pro (coding 79 vs 67).
IF you serve real-time users and latency is a product KPI  →  choose DeepSeek-V4-Pro (~70 tok/s, 0.5s TTFT).
IF you are cost-driven at scale on routine, high-volume workloads  →  choose DeepSeek-V4-Pro ($$0.44/$$1.32 per 1M in/out).
IF long-document recall has to be near-perfect  →  choose DeepSeek-V4-Pro (effective context 94 vs 92).
07

Frequently asked questions

Is Doubao Seed Evolving worth the higher price over DeepSeek-V4-Pro?
At list the input rate is 1.9x higher, but cache discounts and output pricing narrow the effective gap. Pay the premium when Doubao Seed Evolving's stronger dimensions protect revenue; for routine volume DeepSeek-V4-Pro is the economical pick.
Which is better for agentic coding?
DeepSeek-V4-Pro is decisively stronger for coding (79 vs 67 on the aggregate). The gap shows on SWE-style multi-file tasks and long agent loops that need fewer correction turns; Doubao Seed Evolving is fine for routine scripts.
Does Doubao Seed Evolving's higher refusal rate matter in production?
Doubao Seed Evolving refuses about 10% of prompts versus 5% for DeepSeek-V4-Pro. In unattended pipelines that means more retries, fallbacks and manual review, raising effective cost and latency even when the token price is lower.
How do costs compare at 100M tokens/month with caching?
At 100M input + 30M output with 90% of inputs cache-hit, DeepSeek-V4-Pro is about $84/month and Doubao Seed Evolving about $208/month after cache discounts ($84 and $208 at list).
Does the bigger context window actually matter?
Nominal windows are DeepSeek-V4-Pro (1M) and Doubao Seed Evolving (1M), but usable recall follows the effective-context score (94 vs 92). Prefer the higher effective-context model for long-document work where nothing can be missed.
Can I self-host either model?
DeepSeek-V4-Pro ships open weights and can be self-hosted (GPU permitting) for data control; Doubao Seed Evolving is a closed managed API with no self-hosting. Choose open weights when residency or cost-at-scale dominates, managed API for convenience.