新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash

vs

何時用哪一個

當您的輸入包含影片時,請選擇 Dola-Seed-2.0-pro,因為它是兩者中唯一能在文字與圖片之外接受影片的模型,且當您希望每個請求都能選擇關閉思考選項時亦適用。針對長文件或大型程式碼庫的任務,請選擇 deepseek-v4.1-flash:它具備 1000000 token 的上下文長度(對比 256000),允許 393216 輸出 token(對比 131072),且全面成本較低,輸入為 $0.3 與輸出為 $1.2(對比 $0.5 與 $3),因此輸出便宜 2.5x。兩者皆支援聊天、程式碼、推理與工具,因此在文字與圖片任務上,選擇主要取決於上下文長度與價格。

Benchmark 成績

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro: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 Flash16 / 194 / 19
Dola Seed 2.0 Pro DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 其他被測模型 同儕均值 無人分數更高
NL2Repo
N/A
64%
Cybergym
N/A
無人分數更高 88.1%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
90.9%
Agents' Last Exam
N/A
31.8%
BabyVision with tools
N/A
89.6%

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

定價

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro DeepSeek V4.1 Flash Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $0.5 $0.3 1.7×
輸出 / 1M tokens $3 $1.2 2.5×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.1 $0.03 3.3×
快取寫入 - 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 69 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

能力

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
工具使用
思考控制 可配置 是 —— 廠商未公布調節參數
提示快取 隱式 + 顯式 隱式(自動)
快取生命週期 未公開 no fixed TTL (evicted when unused)
最小快取前綴 1024 個 token 未公開

規格

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
輸入模態 文字 影像 影片 文字 影像
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-02-14 2026-09-10
上下文視窗 256K 1M
最大輸出 131K 393K
思考參數
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
-
可接受的值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled (no auto)
reasoning_effort
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
-
預設值 enabled, with reasoning_effort medium and thinking summary on -

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 Pro · 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

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro 通過 · 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.

輸出 563 tok (+416 思考) 延遲 9.4 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

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro 通過 · 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. […]

輸出 1278 tok (+951 思考) 延遲 16.7 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

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }

輸出 506 tok (+452 思考) 延遲 8.6 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

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro 通過 · 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)

輸出 1041 tok (+872 思考) 延遲 11.4 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="Dola-Seed-2.0-pro",
    # 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

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro 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 $0.5,相差 1.7×)。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 Dola Seed 2.0 Pro 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。

Dola Seed 2.0 Pro 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