新帳號 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite vs Claude Sonnet 5.5

vs

什麼情況選哪一個

Dola-Seed-2.0-lite 是價格較低且支援更廣泛輸入的選項:輸入為 $0.25、輸出為 $2,而 claude-sonnet-5-5 為 $2 與 $10,因此輸入便宜 8x、輸出便宜 5x,此外還支援音訊與影片輸入,而 Sonnet 僅接受文字與圖片。claude-sonnet-5-5 提供了 1000000-token 的脈絡長度(相對於 256000),且具備無法完全關閉的自適應思考功能。若需處理高用量的多模態工作並搭配可選的思考功能,請選擇 Dola-Seed-2.0-lite;當您需要極長輸入時,請選擇 claude-sonnet-5-5。

Benchmark 成績

Claude Sonnet 5.5:供應商沒有公布 benchmark 成績。

高於平均沒有模型更高Dola Seed 2.0 Lite4 / 103 / 10
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Claude Sonnet 5.5 其他有成績的模型 其他模型平均 ★ 沒有模型分數更高
SWE Multilingual GPT-5.4 High
66.6%
N/A
WenetSpeech test-net (CER)
沒有模型分數更高 4.47%
N/A
OSWorld-Verified
64.4%
N/A
GPQA Diamond
88.4%
N/A
BrowseComp
64%
N/A
MMVU
76.7%
N/A

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

定價

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Claude Sonnet 5.5 Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $0.25 $2 0.13×
輸出 / 1M tokens $2 $10 0.2×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.05 $0.1 0.5×
快取寫入 - 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) -

費率取自網站建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面都列有最新的價目。

兩者的相對位置:每 1M tokens 的輸入價格,涵蓋同一計費單位下全部 77 個聊天模型(對數尺度)

功能

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Claude Sonnet 5.5
工具使用 是 是
思考控制 可設定 一律開啟
結構化輸出 是 是
提示詞快取 隱式 + 顯式 顯式(由你標記前綴)
快取存活時間 未公布 5m default, 1h option
最小快取前綴 1024 個 token 1024 個 token

規格

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Claude Sonnet 5.5
輸入模態 文字 圖像 音訊 影片 文字 圖像
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-02-14 2026-09-28
知識截止日期 - 2026-06
上下文視窗 256K 1M
最大輸出 131K 128K
思考參數
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
thinking.type
可接受的值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled (no auto)
reasoning_effort
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
thinking.type
  • adaptive (default)
  • between_tools
預設值 enabled, with reasoning_effort medium adaptive, effort high

規格摘錄自各供應商的文件;供應商沒有公布的項目就直接略過,不自行推測。 完整來源: Dola Seed 2.0 Lite · Claude Sonnet 5.5

同一段提示詞,兩個模型,經閘道實測

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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 通過 · 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. […]

輸出 1306 tok (+1096 思考) 延遲 18.2 s

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

是否照指令做(剛好三句,數得出來)、語氣是否貼合對象(寫給 CFO 看),以及下方 token 計量顯示出的隱藏思考計費落差。

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 修正後通過測試

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 通過 · 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. […]

輸出 2620 tok (+2217 思考) 延遲 33.2 s

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

修正是否真的正確(跑得起來)、說明的資訊密度,以及在範圍明確的任務上的 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 有效的 JSON,完全符合 schema

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 通過 · 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" }

輸出 1502 tok (+1439 思考) 延遲 20.2 s

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

是否遵守 schema(不自創欄位)、面對幻覺誘因的表現(題目明確不給 guidance),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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 未通過 · 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. […]

輸出 1870 tok (+1695 思考) 延遲 23.1 s

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

是否遵守限制(字數上限、禁用詞清單、只能有一句問句)、文字風格的特徵,以及長度控制。

改一行程式碼就能在兩者之間切換

下面每個頁籤都列了這兩個模型 ID,要改的只有醒目標示的那兩行。端點、金鑰和請求格式都不變。

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="claude-sonnet-5-5",  # 取消這一行的註解,並把上一行註解掉
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

取得 API 金鑰 →

常見問題

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 Claude Sonnet 5.5 哪個比較便宜?

以「輸入 / 1M tokens」來看,Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 比較便宜($0.25 對 $2,相差 8.0×)。其他項目的結果可能相反,完整價目請看上表;實際成本要看你的用量組合。

可以只串接一次,就對 Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 Claude Sonnet 5.5 做 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩個模型都走同一個 OpenAI 相容端點,用的也是同一把 API 金鑰,切換時只要改一行裡的模型名稱字串。你可以把一部分流量分別導到兩邊,再直接比較帳單。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 與 Claude Sonnet 5.5 支援提示詞快取嗎?

支援。兩者的快取讀取費率都低於輸入費率,所以前綴已經進快取的工作負載,實際成本會比官網價算出來的低。確切的快取讀取價格請見上方定價表。

相關比較