Pairwise benchmark snapshot · Aug 17, 2026noindex (thin pair)

Llama 3.3 70B vs Seedream 4.0 benchmark

Name: Llama 3.3 70B vs Seedream 4.0 AI benchmark comparison
Creator: CompareLLM
License: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

This page compares Llama 3.3 70B (Meta) and Seedream 4.0 (ByteDance) using the latest snapshots we have as of Aug 17, 2026. Every cell below is a dated snapshot from a named public source — we do not invent missing scores, and we do not run SWE-bench ourselves.

Share Analysis:

WhatsApp Telegram X / Post LinkedIn Reddit

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Instant pairwise benchmark recalculation across 400+ LLMs

Model A

Model B

Quick vs:vs Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Llama 3.3 70B (0)vsSeedream 4.0 (5)

Llama 3.3 70B: 0W (0%)Overall: Seedream 4.0Seedream 4.0: 5W (100%)

← Llama 3.3 70BSeedream 4.0 →

Seedream 4.0 (3/3)

Visual Quality & Adherence

Arena Preference Elo, prompt fidelity & typography score

Image Elo

—vs1,225

Prompt adherence

—vs89%

Text rendering

—vs88%

Llama 3.3 70B: 0WSeedream 4.0: 3W

Seedream 4.0 (1/1)

Generation Latency

Time to render full-resolution image snapshot (seconds)

Generation time

—vs2.8s

Llama 3.3 70B: 0WSeedream 4.0: 1W

Seedream 4.0 (1/1)

Cost Efficiency

API inference cost per 1,000 generated images

Price per 1k images

—vs$30/1k

Llama 3.3 70B: 0WSeedream 4.0: 1W

Capability Matchup Radar

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

Each spoke is a skill. Farther from the center is better (0–100th percentile). Tap any dot to inspect details.

Tap any node to inspect

Percentile 0–100

Dimensional AdvantageSeedream 4.0 5/6

Image Preference Elo

No shared data

Generation Latency

No shared data

Image Price Efficiency

No shared data

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

—

Img Elo

High is better

—

Img EloHigh is better

1,225

Gen Time

Low is better

—

Gen TimeLow is better

2.8s

Img $

Low is better

—

Img $Low is better

$30/1k

Prompt %

High is better

—

Prompt %High is better

89%

Text %

High is better

—

Text %High is better

88%

Interactive Simulator (USD)

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Simulate monthly production API costs in USD (US Dollar).

Save up to 100% with Llama 3.3 70B

Monthly Image Production Volume25k images / month (25000 imgs)

Quick Presets:

Llama 3.3 70B$0.00 / mo

Rate: $0/1k

Seedream 4.0$750.00 / mo

Rate: $30/1k

Estimated Cost Delta

Llama 3.3 70B is estimated to save $750.00/month ($9,000/year).

Based on 25k images generated

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatinsufficient data

Need list prices.

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGinsufficient data

Need context sizes.

Screenshots / visionSeedream 4.0

Seedream 4.0 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	insufficient data	Need list prices.
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	insufficient data	Need context sizes.
Screenshots / vision	Seedream 4.0	Seedream 4.0 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

View all news

launchDec 6, 2024

Llama 3.3 70B stays as the previous Meta 70B workhorse

Dec 2024 instruct 70B. Still a self-host baseline. Llama 4 is the 2026 buy.

Community Sentiment

Cast Your Matchup Vote

0 total votes

Community Discussions (0)

No comments posted on this matchup yet. Be the first to share an evaluation note!

Share card

The real PNG is generated at /compare/llama-3-3-70b-vs-seedream-4-0/opengraph-image for crawlers.

PNG

CompareLLM Matrix

Verified head-to-head card

LIVE

Llama 3.3 70B

Elo 1,285

LiveBench49.8%

SWE-bench45.1%

Speed140 tok/s

Output cost$0.32/1M

ByteDance

Seedream 4.0

Elo n/a

LiveBench—

SWE-bench—

Speed—

Output cost—

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Llama 3.3 70B or Seedream 4.0?: We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.
Which is better at coding, Llama 3.3 70B or Seedream 4.0?: SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.
Which is cheaper to run in production?: List prices are missing for at least one model.
Which is faster, Llama 3.3 70B or Seedream 4.0?: We do not have TTFT for both models.
Which has the larger context window?: Context window is missing for at least one model.
Can I self-host either model?: Llama 3.3 70B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.
Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?: No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.
What does preference Elo mean on this page?: Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Llama 3.3 70B and Seedream 4.0 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

All Llama 3.3 70B matchups →|All Seedream 4.0 matchups →

Llama 3.3 70B vs Llama 3.1 70B (previous llama)Llama 3.3 70B vs Llama 4 Maverick (next llama)Seedream 4.0 vs Seedream 5.0 Pro (next seed)Doubao Pro 1.5 vs Llama 3.3 70B Doubao Lite 1.5 vs Llama 3.3 70B Llama 3.1 405B vs Llama 3.3 70B

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Matchup Breakdown

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Category wins across intelligence, speed, and pricing efficiency.

Llama 3.3 70B (0)vsSeedream 4.0 (5)

Llama 3.3 70B: 0W (0%)Overall: Seedream 4.0Seedream 4.0: 5W (100%)

← Llama 3.3 70BSeedream 4.0 →

Seedream 4.0 (3/3)

Visual Quality & Adherence

Arena Preference Elo, prompt fidelity & typography score

Image Elo

—vs1,225

Prompt adherence

—vs89%

Text rendering

—vs88%

Llama 3.3 70B: 0WSeedream 4.0: 3W

Seedream 4.0 (1/1)

Generation Latency

Time to render full-resolution image snapshot (seconds)

Generation time

—vs2.8s

Llama 3.3 70B: 0WSeedream 4.0: 1W

Seedream 4.0 (1/1)

Cost Efficiency

API inference cost per 1,000 generated images

Price per 1k images

—vs$30/1k

Llama 3.3 70B: 0WSeedream 4.0: 1W

Recommended Workload Routing

Repo / coding agentsinsufficient data

Need SWE-bench on both sides.

High-volume chatinsufficient data

Need list prices.

Voice / low-latency UIinsufficient data

Need TTFT on both sides.

Long-document RAGinsufficient data

Need context sizes.

Screenshots / visionSeedream 4.0

Seedream 4.0 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Target Workload	Recommended Pick	Evaluation Rationale
Repo / coding agents	insufficient data	Need SWE-bench on both sides.
High-volume chat	insufficient data	Need list prices.
Voice / low-latency UI	insufficient data	Need TTFT on both sides.
Long-document RAG	insufficient data	Need context sizes.
Screenshots / vision	Seedream 4.0	Seedream 4.0 is the side marked multimodal in the catalog.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is better overall, Llama 3.3 70B or Seedream 4.0?

We do not have preference Elo for both models, so we do not declare an overall winner. Compare the metrics that exist.

Which is better at coding, Llama 3.3 70B or Seedream 4.0?

SWE-bench is missing for at least one model, so we do not rank coding from a single number.

Which is cheaper to run in production?

List prices are missing for at least one model.

Which is faster, Llama 3.3 70B or Seedream 4.0?

We do not have TTFT for both models.

Which has the larger context window?

Context window is missing for at least one model.

Can I self-host either model?

Llama 3.3 70B is marked open-weights in our catalog. The other side is a closed API. Check the provider license before you ship weights.

Are these scores from CompareLLM’s own evals?

No. V1 aggregates public leaderboards (and optional first-party latency pings). Each cell names its source and date. Read /methodology.

What does preference Elo mean on this page?

Preference Elo is a crowd vote from LMArena / Arena. People see two hidden answers and pick the one they like more. The model that wins more often gets a higher Elo. That means people preferred it — not that it passed a school test. It is not SWE-bench, not accuracy, and not a number we invent. Llama 3.3 70B and Seedream 4.0 Elo cells are dated snapshots from the named source — we do not compute Arena ourselves.

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Visual Quality & Adherence

Generation Latency

Cost Efficiency

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

No shared data

No shared data

No shared data

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Llama 3.3 70B stays as the previous Meta 70B workhorse

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Llama 3.3 70B

Seedream 4.0

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons

Swap or Add Any Model to this Matchup

Interactive Comparison Diagram

Tug-of-War Matchup Matrix

Visual Quality & Adherence

Generation Latency

Cost Efficiency

Multi-Dimensional Capability Radar

No shared data

No shared data

No shared data

Full Benchmark Score Matrix

Workload Cost & Savings Calculator

Recommended Workload Routing

Related Editorial Dispatches & Benchmark Notes

Llama 3.3 70B stays as the previous Meta 70B workhorse

Cast Your Matchup Vote

Community Discussions (0)

Share card

CompareLLM Matrix

Llama 3.3 70B

Seedream 4.0

Frequently Asked Questions

Related news

Similar Head-to-Head Comparisons