新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite vs GLM-5.3

vs

何時用哪一個

Dola-Seed-2.0-lite 是價格更低且支援更廣泛輸入的選擇:每百萬輸入 $0.25、輸出 $2,支援文字、影像、影片與音訊輸入,並提供關閉思考的選項。glm-5.3 在輸入端的成本高出 5.6x,輸出端高出 2.2x,僅支援文字且始終會進行思考,但它具備 1000000 token 的上下文視窗(對比 256000),並增加了推理與長上下文標記。對於希望控制思考功能的高用量或多模態工作,請選擇 Dola-Seed-2.0-lite;當單一 prompt 必須容納遠超過 256000 個 token 時,請選擇 glm-5.3。兩者的最大輸出皆限制在 131072 個 token。

Benchmark 成績

高於同儕均值無人分數更高Dola Seed 2.0 Lite4 / 103 / 10GLM-5.315 / 172 / 17
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite GLM-5.3 其他被測模型 同儕均值 無人分數更高
Terminal-Bench 2.1
N/A
88.2%
WenetSpeech test-net (CER)
無人分數更高 4.47%
N/A
OSWorld-Verified
64.4%
N/A
Cybergym
N/A
無人分數更高 84.5%
GDPval-AA v2 Elo · 1508-1769 據 Z.ai 公布 · 2026-09-04
N/A
無人分數更高 1769
GPQA Diamond
88.4%
N/A
BrowseComp
64%
N/A
MMVU
76.7%
N/A

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

定價

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite GLM-5.3 Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $0.25 $1.4 0.18×
輸出 / 1M tokens $2 $4.4 0.45×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.05 $0.26 0.19×

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 67 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite · $0.25 GLM-5.3 · $1.4
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite GLM-5.3
工具使用
思考控制 可配置 常駐開啟
結構化輸出
提示快取 隱式 + 顯式 隱式(自動)
快取生命週期 未公開 未公開
最小快取前綴 1024 個 token 未公開

規格

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite GLM-5.3
輸入模態 文字 影像 音訊 影片 文字
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-02-14 -
上下文視窗 256K 1M
最大輸出 131K 131K
思考參數
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
reasoning_effort
可接受的值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled (no auto)
reasoning_effort
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
reasoning_effort
  • low
  • high
  • max
預設值 enabled, with reasoning_effort medium max

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: Dola Seed 2.0 Lite · GLM-5.3

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

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

GLM-5.3 通過 · 3 sentences

When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating an extensive internal chain-of-thought—thousands of hidden "thinking" tokens the user never sees—before writing any part of the actual answer. Those invisible tokens are billed at output rates, which run several times the price of input tokens, so the billed volume per query jumped even though query volume and per-token pricing stayed the same. The good news is this is a controllable lever, not a rate increase: capping reasoning effort and routing only complex queries to reasoning mode should bring a large share of the added cost back down.

輸出 681 tok (+562 思考) 延遲 18.4 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

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

GLM-5.3 通過 · 8/8 cases

**Fixed:** ```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 ``` **The bug:** The function suffers from a unit error — it counts adjacent equal *pairs* rather than *items* in a run. `cur` is seeded at 0, gains 1 per match, and resets to 0 on a mismatch, so a run of k equal elements can only ever drive `cur` to k−1 (a run of k items contains exactly k−1 neighboring pairs), and `best`, also starting at 0, inherits that shortfall. That's why a single-element input — a run of length 1 containing zero pairs — returns 0 instead of 1, and why a run reaching the last index comes back one short (e.g. […]

輸出 9934 tok (+9438 思考) 延遲 150.7 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

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

GLM-5.3 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on interpretation: - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is the stated topline, though it's on a constant-currency basis. - **growth_pct**: "eleven and change" is extracted as 11 (an approximation, slightly above 11). - **guidance**: null, since formal guidance was explicitly withheld pending the Q4 close.

輸出 2173 tok (+2045 思考) 延遲 35.8 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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 未命中 · 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

GLM-5.3 通過 · 129 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Universal Prompt Caching** We're thrilled to announce prompt caching that works across every major LLM provider. Identical prompts are now cached once at the gateway level, regardless of which model or vendor serves the request downstream. That means up to 90% savings on token costs and dramatically faster responses for repeated queries. How does it work? Our gateway computes a deterministic hash of each incoming prompt, checks the shared cache layer, and returns instant responses when matches exist. New or modified prompts route normally to your configured provider. Deploy with a single configuration flag; no code changes required. Cache invalidation, TTL controls, and detailed analytics are included. Stop paying twice for the same question. Enable Universal Prompt Caching today. --- *Exactly 120 words; one question; no forbidden terms.*

輸出 5418 tok (+5255 思考) 延遲 52.4 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="Dola-Seed-2.0-lite",
    # model="glm-5.3",  # 取消註解此行,並註解上一行
    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 GLM-5.3 哪個比較便宜?

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 在 輸入 / 1m tokens 上較便宜($0.25 對比 $1.4,相差 5.6×)。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 Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 GLM-5.3 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。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 與 GLM-5.3 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