Dola Seed 2.0 Lite vs GLM-5.1
Which one, when — curated verdict, not a benchmark table
Dola-Seed-2.0-lite is the cheaper and wider-input option: $0.25 per million input against $1.4 for glm-5.1 (5.6x less), $2 versus $4.4 on output, $0.05 versus $0.26 on cache reads, plus a 256000-token context and image, video and audio inputs. glm-5.1 is text-in only and newer (released 2026-04-07), with a 200000-token window and explicit reasoning and long-context capability flags, so pick it when you want those declared behaviours in a text pipeline. Both cap output at 131072 tokens, cover chat, code and tools, and let you turn thinking off.
Pricing
| Dola Seed 2.0 Lite | GLM-5.1 | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.25 | $1.4 | 0.18× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $2 | $4.4 | 0.45× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.05 | $0.26 | 0.19× |
Rates from the live catalog at build time; each model page carries the current card.
Where they sit — input price per 1M tokens across all 63 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)
Capabilities
| Dola Seed 2.0 Lite | GLM-5.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool use | yes | yes |
| Thinking control | configurable | configurable |
| Structured output | yes | yes |
| Prompt caching | implicit + explicit | implicit (automatic) |
| Cache lifetime | not published | not published |
| Minimum cached prefix | 1024 tokens | not published |
Specs
| Dola Seed 2.0 Lite | GLM-5.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Input modalities | text image audio video | text |
| Output modalities | text | text |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2026-04-07 |
| Context window | 256K | 200K |
| Max output | 131K | 131K |
| Thinking parameter |
| thinking.type |
| Accepted values | thinking.type
reasoning_effort
| thinking.type
|
| Default | enabled, with reasoning_effort medium | enabled, and the model automatically determines whether to think |
Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: Dola Seed 2.0 Lite · GLM-5.1
One prompt, both models — measured through the gateway
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning on our production LLM requires the model to run resource-intensive multi-step chain-of-thought inference for every customer-facing query, rather than the single-pass inference that powered our original non-reasoning deployment, and GPU compute—which makes up 90% of our total LLM bill—scales directly with the number of compute cycles each query consumes. Our cloud provider’s LLM billing model charges per million processed tokens, and reasoning workflows generate an average of 2.1x more hidden processing tokens (the intermediate problem-solving steps the model never surfaces to end users) that are still billable, pushing our total monthly token consumption just over double what it was prior to enabling the feature. […]
out 1306 tok (+1096 thinking) latency 18.2 s
GLM-5.1 passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning requires the LLM to generate thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens to work through complex logic before producing the final answer. Because we are billed on total token volume, these intermediate steps are charged at the premium output rate, drastically increasing the variable cost per query. The invoice doubled simply because the model is now doing roughly twice the computational work per request, trading higher variable compute costs for significantly improved analytical accuracy.
out 913 tok (+827 thinking) latency 10.9 s
Instruction following (exactly three sentences — countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite passed · 8/8 cases
### Corrected Function ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: # Handle empty input edge case return 0 best = cur = 1 # Base run length of 1 for any non-empty single element for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 # Reset run length for the new, different element return best ``` ### Bug Explanation (single paragraph) The original function’s core flaw was that it counted the number of consecutive equal adjacent element pairs, rather than the number of elements in the run itself, leading to all results being off by one, which caused both reported issues: a run of k equal elements only has k-1 consecutive matching pairs, so the original function’s maximum `best` value was always one less than the true element count of the longest run. […]
out 2620 tok (+2217 thinking) latency 33.2 s
GLM-5.1 passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` The original function tracks the number of adjacent equal pairs rather than the actual run length. By initializing `cur` and `best` to 0 and incrementing `cur` only when a match occurs, a run of length L produces a count of L−1. This causes single‑element inputs to return 0 (since the loop never runs) and generally returns a value one less than the true run length, effectively omitting the final element of any run—including those that end at the last index. […]
out 2642 tok (+2414 thinking) latency 26.1 s
Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Formal guidance withheld pending Q4 clos"
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Formal guidance withheld pending Q4 close" }
out 1502 tok (+1439 thinking) latency 20.2 s
GLM-5.1 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": "eleven and change", "guidance": null } ```
out 1465 tok (+1410 thinking) latency 16.1 s
Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite missed · 141 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Today we launch Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, a new feature for our Core API Gateway built to cut redundant AI costs and latency for teams routing requests across multiple LLM providers. Many development teams rotate between OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google Gemini to balance performance, cost, and capability, but identical prompts get reprocessed from scratch with every provider switch, wasting tokens and slowing response times. This feature stores validated prompt responses at the gateway layer, so repeat requests pull from cache regardless of which provider they route to, with configurable TTLs and built-in compliance with all major provider data policies. […]
out 1870 tok (+1695 thinking) latency 23.1 s
GLM-5.1 passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
We are thrilled to introduce prompt caching across providers in the API gateway. Why pay twice for the same prompt context? Now, when your application sends identical prompt prefixes to different LLM providers, our gateway automatically caches the input, reducing latency and cutting costs. This feature intelligently recognizes repeated prompt structures across OpenAI, Anthropic, and others, storing them efficiently at the network edge. Developers no longer need to manage separate caching logic for each individual provider. Instead, our unified system handles it directly, ensuring faster response times on all subsequent requests. Stop wasting valuable tokens on redundant processing workloads. Upgrade your integration today and experience immediate performance gains while keeping your infrastructure simple and your overall monthly billing incredibly low.
out 7589 tok (+7447 thinking) latency 188.9 s
Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.
Switch between them with one line
Both ids are in every tab below — the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="Dola-Seed-2.0-lite",
# model="glm-5.1", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "Dola-Seed-2.0-lite",
// model: "glm-5.1", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "Dola-Seed-2.0-lite",
# "model": "glm-5.1", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}]
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "Dola-Seed-2.0-lite",
// Model: "glm-5.1", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("Dola-Seed-2.0-lite")
// .model("glm-5.1") // uncomment this line, comment the one above
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Which is cheaper, Dola Seed 2.0 Lite or GLM-5.1?
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.25 vs $1.4, 5.6× apart). Other rows may point the other way — the table above carries the full card, and real cost depends on your mix.
Can I A/B test Dola Seed 2.0 Lite against GLM-5.1 without two integrations?
Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key — switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.
Do Dola Seed 2.0 Lite and GLM-5.1 support prompt caching?
Yes — both bill cached reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.