Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs GPT-6.1 Terra

vs

Which one, when

For prompts up to 128000 input tokens, Dola-Seed-2.0-pro costs less on input and output and accepts video. Choose gpt-6.1-terra for its much larger context window and structured outputs when long text and image inputs matter more than video support.

Pricing

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro GPT-6.1 Terra Δ
Input / 1M tokens $0.5 $1 0.5×
Output / 1M tokens $3 $5 0.6×
Cache read / 1M tokens $0.1 $0.05 2×
Cache write - 1.25x (30m) / 2.5x (12h) -

Rates from the live catalogue at build time; each model page carries the current rate card.

Where they sit · input price per 1M tokens across all 80 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)

Capabilities

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro GPT-6.1 Terra
Tool calling yes yes
Thinking control configurable configurable
Structured output - yes
Prompt caching implicit + explicit implicit + explicit
Cache lifetime not published at least 30m by default, 12h option on the Responses API
Minimum cached prefix 1,024 tokens 1,024 tokens

Specs

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro GPT-6.1 Terra
Input modalities text image video text image
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-02-14 2026-10-26
Knowledge cutoff - 2026-06
Context window 256K 1.1M
Max output 131K 128K
Thinking parameter
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
reasoning.effort
Accepted values
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled (no auto)
reasoning_effort
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
reasoning.effort
  • none
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
Default enabled, with reasoning_effort medium and thinking summary on medium

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 Pro · GPT-6.1 Terra

One prompt, both models, measured through the gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. CHECK exactly 3 sentences

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro passed · 3 sentences

Reasoning-enabled LLMs do not generate final answers in one pass: they run hundreds of unshown internal trial, cross-check, and correction steps for every user request, and every one of these hidden steps consumes billable GPU time just like the visible output text. Unlike our prior standard chat workload which only processed exactly what users typed, reasoning mode automatically executes these validation loops by default, with no visible indicator to end users that extra compute is being consumed. This 2x increase is not a billing error or rogue usage spike: industry benchmarks consistently put reasoning workloads at 1.7-2.6x the compute cost of equivalent standard LLM requests, and this pricing dynamic is almost never clearly disclosed on vendor rate cards.

out 563 tok (+416 thinking) latency 9.4 s

GPT-6.1 Terra passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning caused the model to process additional internal tokens before producing each answer, even though those tokens are not visible to users. Those tokens are generally billable, increasing the cost per request and potentially doubling the bill even if usage stayed the same. To confirm the cause, compare request counts, model pricing, and token usage—including reasoning tokens—before and after the change.

out 196 tok (+115 thinking) latency 4.6 s

Instruction following (exactly three sentences, so countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. CHECK fix passes tests

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro passed · 8/8 cases

### Corrected Implementation ```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 ``` --- ### Bug Explanation The original code has three critical linked flaws: 1. It initialized run counters `best` and `cur` to `0` instead of `1`, failing to account for the fact that *every individual element is already a valid run of length 1* -- this causes single-element inputs to incorrectly return `0`. 2. `cur` only counted how many extra matching elements followed the start of a run, so it always tracked one less than the actual run length, and it reset to `0` (instead of `1`) when a new run began, preserving this off-by-one error for all runs. 3. […]

out 1278 tok (+951 thinking) latency 16.7 s

GPT-6.1 Terra passed · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if len(xs) == 0: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The original code counted matching *adjacent pairs* rather than items, so every nonempty run was undercounted by one, including a single-element input. It did update `best` for matches at the last index, but still undercounted those runs. The fix starts each run at length one and updates `best` as the run grows.

out 331 tok (+172 thinking) latency 6.3 s

Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. CHECK valid JSON, schema exact

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }

out 506 tok (+452 thinking) latency 8.6 s

GPT-6.1 Terra passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": "Withheld pending the Q4 close" }

out 317 tok (+261 thinking) latency 6.9 s

Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. CHECK 120 words, 0 banned words

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro passed · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we’re rolling out cross-provider prompt caching for our API gateway. For engineering teams routing LLM requests across OpenAI, Anthropic, Mistral and open source models, this feature stores identical prompt payloads at the gateway layer, rather than relying on per-provider cache implementations limited to single endpoints. How much time and compute could your team save by avoiding redundant token processing for repeated system prompts, context windows, or common user queries? Cache hits return responses in under 10ms, with configurable TTL, granular purge controls, and per-application cache partitioning. Early access teams running support bots, batch inference and internal assistants recorded 42-67% lower LLM spend. This feature is live for all gateway users today, with no required code changes to existing routing workflows. (120 words)

out 1041 tok (+872 thinking) latency 11.4 s

GPT-6.1 Terra passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Meet Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that stores reusable prompts across providers, helping teams reduce latency and control costs without changing how they build. When a request matches a cached prompt, the gateway retrieves the stored result instead of sending the same work again. Need to route traffic between models or vendors? Prompt Cache works across supported providers, giving your applications a consistent caching layer as your stack evolves. Set expiration policies, monitor cache performance, and choose which requests qualify through familiar gateway controls. Your team can spend less time repeating requests and more time improving the experiences customers rely on. Start using Prompt Cache today and make every request work harder for your application and your budget.

out 579 tok (+440 thinking) latency 9.1 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-pro",
    # model="gpt-6.1-terra",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get your API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Dola Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-6.1 Terra?

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro is cheaper on the "Input / 1M tokens" row ($0.5 vs $1, 2.0× apart). Other rows may point the other way; the table above carries the full rate card, and real cost depends on your mix.

Can I A/B test Dola Seed 2.0 Pro against GPT-6.1 Terra without two integrations?

Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key. Switching is a one-line change to the model id, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.

Do Dola Seed 2.0 Pro and GPT-6.1 Terra support prompt caching?

Yes. Both bill cache 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.

Related comparisons

From our measured studies