Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs GPT-6 Astra
Which one, when
Choose Dola-Seed-2.0-pro to process video inputs or to utilize its lower rates of $0.5 per million input tokens and $3 per million output tokens. Opt for gpt-6-astra if your workload requires its larger 1050000 context window, though it charges 20 times more for input at $10 per million tokens. Both models allow you to disable thinking and offer similar generation limits, providing 131072 and 128000 maximum output tokens respectively.
Benchmarks
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro: the vendor has not published benchmark scores.
Vendor-published: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic OpenAI
Pricing
| Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.5 | $10 | 0.05× |
| Output / 1M tokens | $3 | $50 | 0.06× |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.1 | $1 | 0.1× |
| Cache write | - | no separate charge | - |
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 68 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)
Capabilities
| Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool use | yes | yes |
| Thinking control | configurable | configurable |
| Structured output | - | yes |
| Prompt caching | implicit + explicit | implicit (automatic) |
| Cache lifetime | not published | 5-10m, up to 1h |
| Minimum cached prefix | 1024 tokens | 1024 tokens |
Specs
| Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | GPT-6 Astra | |
|---|---|---|
| Input modalities | text image video | text image |
| Output modalities | text | text |
| Released | 2026-02-14 | 2026-09-03 |
| Knowledge cutoff | - | 2026-04 |
| Context window | 256K | 1.1M |
| Max output | 131K | 128K |
| Thinking parameter |
| reasoning.effort |
| Accepted values | thinking.type
reasoning_effort
| reasoning.effort
|
| 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 Astra
One prompt, both models - measured through the gateway
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 Astra passed · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning makes the model do more work per request, often generating internal reasoning tokens that are billed even though they do not appear in the final answer. If traffic, model choice, and pricing stayed the same, those extra tokens likely explain why our bill doubled—not longer answers or more users. We should verify the usage breakdown, then reserve higher reasoning levels for tasks where improved results justify the added cost.
out 283 tok (+196 thinking) latency 17.2 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 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 Astra passed · 8/8 cases
```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: 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 counts equal adjacent pairs rather than items, so every nonempty run is undercounted by one: a single-element input returns `0`, and a run of three equal items returns `2`. Starting and resetting `cur` to `1` counts the first item of each run, while the empty-input check preserves a result of `0`. Updating `best` after each iteration includes runs ending at the last index without needing a final flush; the original also updated during trailing runs, but undercounted them.
out 321 tok (+131 thinking) latency 13.5 s
Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.
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 Astra passed · 5/5 fields, guidance "Formal guidance is withheld pending the "
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": "eleven and change", "guidance": "Formal guidance is withheld pending the Q4 close." }
out 329 tok (+267 thinking) latency 16.9 s
Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.
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 Astra passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Introducing Cross Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that reuses eligible prompt content across supported AI providers. Why pay to process the same context every time? Configure caching once at the gateway, then route requests between models while keeping shared instructions, reference material, and conversation prefixes ready for reuse. Caching controls let teams set expiration windows, isolate tenants, and exclude sensitive content. Cache analytics show hit rates, estimated savings, and latency trends, helping developers tune performance with confidence. Existing routing policies continue to work, so adoption fits your current architecture. Start with a single application, measure the results, and expand as needed. Available today in the dashboard and API, with documentation and examples to guide your first deployment.
out 665 tok (+516 thinking) latency 19.3 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-astra", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
reasoning_effort="medium",
)
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-pro",
// model: "gpt-6-astra", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
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-pro",
# "model": "gpt-6-astra", # uncomment this line, comment the one above
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'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-pro",
// Model: "gpt-6-astra", // uncomment this line, comment the one above
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
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-pro")
// .model("gpt-6-astra") // uncomment this line, comment the one above
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));FAQ
Which is cheaper, Dola Seed 2.0 Pro or GPT-6 Astra?
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.5 vs $10, 20× 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 Pro against GPT-6 Astra 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 Pro and GPT-6 Astra 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.