Skip to content
#10SOct 1, 2026Evidence B

Step-5-Pre

StepFun · Undisclosed (MoE)

The generation that carries StepFun into tier S

A preview of StepFun’s fifth generation, released 1 October 2026 and two generations past the edge-orchestration Step-3: perception 96, documents 95 and agents 94 all sit in tier-S territory, video 91 gives the family long-video QA for the first time, and a composite of 93.0 ranks #10 overall. At ¥4/1M output tokens it lands between GLM-5.3-Flash (¥3) and GLM-5.3 (¥9). The trade-off is explicit: generation 78, no creative work and no open weights.

TextImageVideoAudioNative

Last updated Oct 18, 2026Editorial scoring

Bottom line

If you want a third option — edge-born but now competitive in the cloud — Step-5-Pre is the only answer in October 2026: near-flagship multimodal perception at half the flagship price, keeping StepFun’s shared edge-and-cloud stack. It is not a flagship replacement because it does no image generation, 128K context is small for 2026, and there are no open weights — on-prem means negotiating a licence.

Eight-dimension breakdown

editorial mapping · 0–100
Perception96Document95Chart QA93Video91Agent94Generation78Chinese93Ecosystem948D
  • Step-5-Pre93.0
Visual perception & grounding20%
96
Document parsing & Chinese OCR18%
95
Chart & document reasoning14%
93
Video & long-horizon reasoning14%
91
GUI agents & tool use14%
94
Generation & editing6%
78
Chinese context & culture6%
93
Ecosystem, cost & availability8%
94

Weights: perception 20 / documents 18 / charts 14 / video 14 / agents 14 / generation 6 / Chinese 6 / ecosystem 8. Definitions and sources on the methodology page.

Public benchmarks

as reported, not converted
Benchmark / metricValueNote
模态4Text/image/video/audio
输出单价¥4Between the two tier-S options
上下文128KOfficial spec

Public scores come from different versions and prompts and are not interchangeable with our composite; they are one evidence input.

Scenario mapping

five stress tests, one scale
ScenarioScoreObservation
Chinese receipt OCR95 · Stable on official forms and receipts; handwriting weaker
Chart data extraction93 · Reliable on stacked multi-series charts
30-min video QA91 · Long video is usable for the first time; occasional drift
Mobile GUI control94 · Cross-app planning near the top tier
Chinese cultural context93 · Solid general context; average on obscure allusions

Strengths and limitations

Strengths

  • Perception 96 matches Kimi K3, and video 91 gives StepFun long-video QA for the first time.
  • At ¥4/1M output tokens it sits between the two tier-S options while matching flagship-level perception.
  • Same stack as Step-3, with one multimodal interface across edge and cloud, so migration is cheap.

Limitations

  • Generation and editing at 78 — effectively no usable text-to-image or Chinese glyph rendering.
  • 128K context is small by 2026 standards; whole manuals and long video still need chunking.
  • Closed weights with undisclosed parameters, grade B, and third-party reproduction still pending.

Price and real cost

List price

¥4/M tokens

≈ ¥4 / 1M output tokens. For 1,000 images at 1,024px, ~1,100 image tokens each and 300 output tokens, the monthly cost is about ¥2.4 (assuming input at 25% of output price).

Use your volume

About Step-5-Pre

Is Step-5-Pre open source?

Licence: Commercial + on-prem licence. No public weights; access is via vendor API or an on-prem licence.

How much does Step-5-Pre cost?

≈ ¥4 / 1M output tokens. It ranks #10 with a composite of 93.0. Real bills depend on resolution, tiling, caching and volume discounts.

What is Step-5-Pre best for?

A flagship-class stand-in for edge-cloud products; Production video understanding; Speech-plus-vision-plus-video devices。

Why does Step-5-Pre score 93.0?

The composite weights eight dimensions: perception 20%, documents 18%, charts 14%, video 14%, agents 14%, generation 6%, Chinese 6%, ecosystem 8%. Its strongest dimension is Visual perception & grounding; its weakest is Generation & editing.

Personal ranking · Not an official score

Every ranking, score and comparison on this page is an independent personal ranking, not an official score, and represents no vendor, institution or regulator. Scores are a subjective mapping of public evidence under our own weights — change the weights and the order changes. Disagree, or spotted a factual error? Contact the site owner: jizhi2024@foxmail.com — we check each report and log corrections in the changelog.