新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

vs

何時用哪一個

claude-sonnet-5-5 與 deepseek-v4.1-flash 兩者皆可接收文字與圖片輸入,回傳文字,具備 1000000-token 的上下文視窗,並涵蓋對話、程式碼、工具及推理功能,因此真正的差異在於成本與輸出空間。deepseek-v4.1-flash 的輸入成本約便宜 6.7x($0.3 對比 $2),輸出成本約便宜 8.3x($1.2 對比 $10),快取讀取為 $0.03 對比 $0.2,且允許高達 393216 輸出 token,對比為 128000。當您需要 Anthropic 較新的 2026-09-28 發布版本及其 2026-06 知識截止日期時,請選擇 claude-sonnet-5-5;若處理高用量或長篇生成任務,請選擇 DeepSeek 模型。

Benchmark 成績

Claude Sonnet 5.5:廠商沒有公布過 benchmark 成績。

高於同儕均值無人分數更高DeepSeek V4.1 Flash14 / 194 / 19
Claude Sonnet 5.5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 其他被測模型 同儕均值 ★ 無人分數更高
DeepSWE 1.1
N/A
無人分數更高 74.2%
Cybergym
N/A
無人分數更高 88.1%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
90.9%
Agents' Last Exam
N/A
31.8%
Chartography with tools
N/A
78.9%

廠商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

定價

Claude Sonnet 5.5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $2 $0.3 6.7×
輸出 / 1M tokens $10 $1.2 8.3×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.2 $0.03 6.7×
快取寫入 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) 不額外計費 -

費率取自建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面皆附有目前的費率卡。

它們的相對位置 — 在此計費單位下,所有 76 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

能力

Claude Sonnet 5.5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
工具使用 是 是
思考控制 常駐開啟 是 —— 廠商未公布調節參數
結構化輸出 是 -
提示快取 顯式(由您標記前綴) 隱式(自動)
快取生命週期 5m default, 1h option no fixed TTL (evicted when unused)
最小快取前綴 1024 個 token 未公開

規格

Claude Sonnet 5.5 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
輸入模態 文字 影像 文字 影像
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-09-28 2026-09-10
知識截止日期 2026-06 -
上下文視窗 1M 1M
最大輸出 128K 393K
思考參數 thinking.type -
可接受的值
thinking.type
  • adaptive (default)
  • between_tools
-
預設值 adaptive, effort high -

規格摘錄自各供應商的文件;供應商未發布的資料列會直接省略,而非自行推測。 完整來源: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

單一提示詞,兩款模型 — 經由閘道測量

提示詞 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 檢查 恰好 3 句

Claude Sonnet 5.5 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model "think" before it answers, and that internal thinking is generated as extra text (reasoning tokens) that we are billed for at the same rate as output tokens, even though users never see it. Output tokens also cost several times more than input tokens, so a single request that used to produce a short answer can now generate many times more billable text behind the scenes. Because our request volume and prompts didn't change, the doubling comes almost entirely from this hidden thinking, and we can bring it down by limiting reasoning effort, turning it off for simple tasks, and reserving it for the workloads where the accuracy gain justifies the cost.

輸出 205 tok 延遲 3.6 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning changed the unit economics: the model now spends extra billable tokens internally to “think” before producing the answer, and those reasoning tokens are charged like output tokens even though users never see them. That added token generation—plus longer contexts and occasional retries on harder prompts—roughly doubled our cost per request. We can control this by capping reasoning depth, routing only complex queries to reasoning models, and caching common prompts to bring the bill back down.

輸出 423 tok (+327 思考) 延遲 14.6 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,可數)、受眾適配(面向 CFO 的語氣),以及下方 token 計量所暴露的隱藏思考計費缺口。

提示詞 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. 檢查 修復通過測試

Claude Sonnet 5.5 通過 · 8/8 cases

**The bug:** `cur` counts the number of *adjacent equal pairs* rather than the number of items in the run. A run of length k contains only k−1 such pairs, so every result is one too small. The counter also starts at 0 and the loop starts at index 1, so a single-element list never updates `best` and returns 0 instead of 1. (An empty list should return 0.) In addition, `cur` resets to 0 on a mismatch, when it should reset to 1, because the item at `xs[i]` begins a new run of length 1. The claim that it "misses runs ending at the last index" is really the same off-by-one: the final run is counted, but as one less than its true length. Because `best` is updated inside the loop on every extension, the last run isn't skipped. […]

輸出 444 tok 延遲 6.7 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 通過 · 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 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that `cur` is counting equal adjacent pairs, not elements in the current run: every time `xs[i] == xs[i - 1]`, the run length increases by one element, but the first element of the run was never counted, so all runs are undercounted by one. Also, `best` starts at `0`, so single-element inputs return `0` instead of `1`, and a one-element run ending at the last index is missed entirely.

輸出 918 tok (+733 思考) 延遲 11.4 s

修復是否真的正確(可執行)、解釋的資訊密度,以及在一個邊界明確的任務上的 token 效率。

提示詞 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. 檢查 合法 JSON,schema 精確

Claude Sonnet 5.5 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

Here is the extracted JSON: ```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on the choices: - **quarter**: The text says "September quarter" without specifying a fiscal year or Q-number, so I kept the wording as stated. - **revenue_usd_m**: The text gives "412" for the topline, with no currency or unit stated explicitly. I've taken it as 412 million USD per the field definition, but the text does not confirm that, and the figure is constant-currency. - **growth_pct**: "Eleven and change" means slightly above 11, so 11 is an approximation. The exact figure isn't given. - **guidance**: Guidance is withheld pending the Q4 close, so no guidance is stated, hence null.

輸出 300 tok 延遲 3.5 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":11.0,"guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}

輸出 1707 tok (+1667 思考) 延遲 15.1 s

schema 服從度(不臆造欄位)、幻覺壓力(guidance 明確被暫緩給出),以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。

提示詞 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. 檢查 120 詞,0 個禁用詞

Claude Sonnet 5.5 通過 · 122 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** Your API gateway now caches prompts across every connected LLM provider, whether you route traffic to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or a self-hosted model. Here's how it works: the gateway fingerprints each prompt prefix, stores it centrally, and applies the right provider-specific caching mechanism automatically. When you switch providers or fail over during an outage, your cached context follows you. Early testing shows input token costs dropping by up to 70% on repeated system prompts and long documents, with latency improvements of 40% or more on cache hits. Tired of paying to send the same instructions thousands of times a day? Enable it with one configuration flag. Cache rules, TTLs, and per-team isolation are available in the dashboard today.

輸出 266 tok 延遲 3.8 s

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 通過 · 116 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we're launching Cross-Provider Prompt Cache for our API gateway. It stores identical prompt requests and their responses across supported model providers, then serves cached results when a match is found. Teams can cut duplicate inference costs, reduce latency, and keep behavior consistent during provider failover. The cache works with configurable TTLs, per-route rules, and cache-key controls, so you decide what is reusable and what must stay fresh. Does your application send the same prompts to multiple providers? Now your gateway can answer many of those calls without another upstream request. Existing observability dashboards show hit rates, saved tokens, and estimated spend reduction. Enable it in the gateway console, set your policy, and start caching today.

輸出 917 tok (+770 思考) 延遲 9.0 s

約束服從度(字數預算、禁用詞表、唯一的那句問句)、文風指紋,以及長度控制。

只需一行程式碼即可在兩者間切換

以下每個頁籤中都有這兩個 ID — 醒目提示的這兩行是唯一的修改處。相同的端點,相同的金鑰,相同的請求結構。

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-sonnet-5-5",
    # model="deepseek-v4.1-flash",  # 取消註解此行,並註解上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

取得 API 金鑰 →

常見問題

Claude Sonnet 5.5 和 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 哪個比較便宜?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 在 輸入 / 1m tokens 上較便宜($0.3 對比 $2,相差 6.7×)。其他項目可能呈現相反結果 — 上表提供完整資訊,實際成本取決於您的使用組合。

我可以在不進行兩次整合的情況下,對 Claude Sonnet 5.5 和 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 進行 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩者皆透過同一個相容 OpenAI 的端點提供服務,並使用同一把 API 金鑰 — 切換只需更改一行的模型字串,因此您可以將部分流量分別導向兩者並直接比較帳單。

Claude Sonnet 5.5 與 DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 支援提示快取嗎?

是的 — 兩者的快取讀取費率皆低於其輸入費率,因此具有暖前綴的工作負載成本會低於牌價所示。確切的快取讀取列請見上方的定價表。

相關比較