Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs Claude Opus 5
Cuál usar y cuándo — veredicto seleccionado, no una tabla de benchmarks
Dola-Seed-2.0-pro es el más barato de los dos en cada línea de la tarifa: $0.5 frente a $5 por millón de tokens de entrada (10x menos), $3 frente a $25 en la salida (aproximadamente 8.3x menos) y $0.1 frente a $0.5 en lecturas de caché, y es el único que acepta entrada de vídeo, junto con texto e imagen. claude-opus-5 responde con espacio para trabajar: un contexto de 1000000 tokens frente a 256000, aunque Dola-Seed-2.0-pro permite ligeramente más salida (131072 frente a 128000 tokens). Elige Dola-Seed-2.0-pro para trabajos de alto volumen o que contengan vídeo, y claude-opus-5 cuando una sola petición deba contener mucha más entrada a la vez.
Precios
| Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | Claude Opus 5 | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Entrada / 1M tokens | $0.5 | $5 | 0.1× |
| Salida / 1M tokens | $3 | $25 | 0.12× |
| Lectura de caché / 1M tokens | $0.1 | $0.5 | 0.2× |
| Escritura en caché | — | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | — |
Tarifas del catálogo en vivo en el momento de la compilación; la página de cada modelo incluye la ficha actualizada.
Dónde se sitúan — precio de entrada por 1M de tokens en todos los 63 modelos de chat en esta unidad de facturación (escala logarítmica)
Capacidades
| Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | Claude Opus 5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Uso de herramientas | sí | sí |
| Control de pensamiento | configurable | configurable |
| Salida estructurada | — | sí |
| Caché de prompt | implícito + explícito | explícito (marcas el prefijo) |
| Tiempo de vida de la caché | no publicado | 5m default, 1h option |
| Prefijo mínimo en caché | 1024 tokens | 1024 tokens |
Especificaciones
| Dola Seed 2.0 Pro | Claude Opus 5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Modalidades de entrada | texto imagen vídeo | texto imagen |
| Modalidades de salida | texto | texto |
| Lanzamiento | 2026-02-14 | 2026-07-24 |
| Límite de conocimiento | — | 2026-05 |
| Ventana de contexto | 256K | 1M |
| Salida máxima | 131K | 128K |
| Parámetro de pensamiento |
|
|
| Valores aceptados | thinking.type
reasoning_effort
| thinking.type
effort
|
| Predeterminado | enabled, with reasoning_effort medium and thinking summary on | thinking on effort
|
Las especificaciones se transcriben de la documentación de cada proveedor; si un proveedor no publica una fila, se omite en lugar de inferirse. Fuentes completas: Dola Seed 2.0 Pro · Claude Opus 5
Un prompt, ambos modelos — medido a través del gateway
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro superado · 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.
salida 563 tok (+416 pensamiento) latencia 9.4 s
Claude Opus 5 superado · 3 sentences
When reasoning is enabled, the model generates a hidden chain of "thinking" tokens before it writes the visible answer, and those internal tokens are billed at the output rate even though no one ever sees them — commonly 3–10x more tokens than the response itself. Because output tokens are priced several times higher than input tokens, that added volume hits us at our most expensive rate, which is why the bill roughly doubled while our request count stayed flat. The spend is controllable: we can cap the reasoning budget per call, route only genuinely hard requests to reasoning mode and cheaper models for the rest, and track cost per successfully completed task rather than cost per token, since a single correct answer usually beats three cheap retries plus human cleanup.
salida 529 tok latencia 9.0 s
Seguimiento de la instrucción (exactamente tres frases — contables), adaptación a la audiencia (registro de CFO), y la brecha de facturación por pensamiento oculto que los medidores de tokens de abajo dejan ver.
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro superado · 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. […]
salida 1278 tok (+951 pensamiento) latencia 16.7 s
Claude Opus 5 superado · 8/8 cases
## Fixed version ```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 else: cur = 1 if cur > best: best = cur return best ``` ## The bug The counters were tracking the wrong quantity: `cur` counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *elements in the current run*, and both counters started at `0` instead of `1`. Since a run of length *n* contains only *n − 1* adjacent equal pairs, every result came back one too small — `[1, 1]` returned 1, `[3, 3, 3]` returned 2 — and a single-element list returned 0 because the loop body never executed and `best` kept its initial value of `0`. […]
salida 1094 tok latencia 16.1 s
Si el arreglo es realmente correcto (ejecutable), la densidad de la explicación, y la eficiencia en tokens sobre una tarea acotada.
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro superado · 5/5 fields, guidance null
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }
salida 506 tok (+452 pensamiento) latencia 8.6 s
Claude Opus 5 superado · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: - **quarter**: "September quarter" is labeled Q3 because the text refers to an upcoming "Q4 close," implying a calendar-aligned fiscal year. No fiscal year is given. - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is stated as constant-currency and hedged ("call it"), so it's approximate; the currency is not explicitly stated as USD. - **growth_pct**: "up eleven and change" means slightly more than 11, so 11 is a floor rather than an exact figure.
salida 539 tok latencia 7.6 s
Obediencia al esquema (sin campos inventados), presión de alucinación (guidance se retiene explícitamente), y diferencias en la ruta de salida estructurada.
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro superado · 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)
salida 1041 tok (+872 pensamiento) latencia 11.4 s
Claude Opus 5 superado · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** We're introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching in the API Gateway. Repeated system prompts, long documents, and few-shot examples are stored once at the gateway layer and reused across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Instead of paying full input token costs on every request, your application sends a cache reference, and the gateway rehydrates the context before forwarding it downstream. Why does that matter? Teams running high-volume agents and retrieval pipelines typically see input token spend fall 40 to 70 percent, with median latency dropping by several hundred milliseconds. Caches are scoped per project, encrypted at rest, and invalidated automatically when a prompt template changes. Enable it with a single header, and see the docs for TTL tuning and per-route controls.
salida 1593 tok latencia 19.1 s
Obediencia a las restricciones (presupuesto de palabras, lista de palabras prohibidas, la única pregunta), huella de estilo, y control de la longitud.
Cambia entre ellos con una línea
Ambos IDs están en cada pestaña a continuación — el par de líneas resaltadas es la única edición. Mismo endpoint, misma clave, misma estructura de solicitud.
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="claude-opus-5", # descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
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: "claude-opus-5", // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
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": "claude-opus-5", # descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
"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: "claude-opus-5", // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
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("claude-opus-5") // descomenta esta línea, comenta la de arriba
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));Preguntas frecuentes
¿Cuál es más barato, Dola Seed 2.0 Pro o Claude Opus 5?
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro es más barato en entrada / 1m tokens ($0.5 vs $5, con una diferencia de 10×). Otras filas pueden indicar lo contrario — la tabla anterior muestra la ficha completa, y el costo real depende de su combinación.
¿Puedo hacer pruebas A/B de Dola Seed 2.0 Pro frente a Claude Opus 5 sin dos integraciones?
Sí. Ambos se sirven a través del mismo endpoint compatible con OpenAI con una clave API — el cambio es una modificación de una línea en la cadena del modelo, por lo que puede enrutar una fracción del tráfico a cada uno y comparar las facturas directamente.
¿Admiten Dola Seed 2.0 Pro y Claude Opus 5 caché de prompts?
Sí — ambos cobran las lecturas en caché por debajo de su tarifa de entrada, por lo que las cargas de trabajo con prefijo caliente cuestan menos de lo que sugieren las tarifas de lista. Las filas exactas de lectura en caché están en la tabla de precios de arriba.