Model Comparison
Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct
vs. Step 3.7 Flash
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · ByteDance Seed, StepFun
Recommended Pick
StStep 3.7 Flash10 metric winsStrongest on: Input price, Throughput, Intelligence
Best Value
Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct
100.0 value score
53.9 reasoning / $0.30/1M
Lowest Price
Step 3.7 Flash
$0.20/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct
53.9 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Step 3.7 Flash
39.6 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Reasoning gap
Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct leads Step 3.7 Flash by 10.2 points on reasoning.
Top-pick rationale
Step 3.7 Flash wins 10 measurable categories, including Input price, Throughput, Intelligence, GPQA.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct
ByteDance Seed
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Step 3.7 Flash
StepFun
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Chat with leading AI models
Use Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini alongside with EU-Hosted Models like Deepseek, Qwen & Kimi.
EU-hosted inference
Servers in Germany & Finland. Designed to meet strict GDPR and ISO 27001 compliance requirements.
Full Comparison
| Metric | By Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct | Top Pick St Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $0.21/1M | $0.20/1M |
| Output Cost | $0.57/1M | $1.15/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.30/1M | $0.44/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | ByteDance Seed | StepFun |
| Release Date | Aug 20, 2025 | May 29, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 389.7 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 1053ms |
| Latency | — | 6184ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 100.0 | 55.6 |
| Reasoning Score | 53.9 | 43.7 |
| Intelligence | 18.3 | 30.3 |
| Coding | — | 39.6 |
| Math | 84.7 | — |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 72.6% | 80.9% |
| MMLU Pro | 81.5% | — |
| HLE | 9.1% | 19.9% |
| LiveCodeBench | 76.5% | — |
| AIME 2025 | 84.7% | — |
| SciCode | 36.5% | 40.0% |
| LCR | 57.7% | 63.7% |
| IFBench | 41.9% | 67.3% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 49.4% | 98.5% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 6.8% | 35.6% |
Key Takeaways
Step 3.7 Flash offers the best value at $0.20/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct has the strongest reasoning profile with a 53.9 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Step 3.7 Flash reaches a 39.6 coding index,making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens,suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Seed-OSS-36B-Instruct
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
Step 3.7 Flash
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
