🎁 新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol

vs

何時該用哪一個 — 綜合評斷,而非基準測試數據表

兩款模型的脈絡幾乎相同(gemini-3.7-flash 為 1048576,gpt-5.6-sol 為 1050000),對話、視覺、程式碼、工具和推理標誌也一致,所以真正的差別是價格、輸入輸出和輸出長度。大批量工作或音訊、視訊輸入選 gemini-3.7-flash:輸入 $0.75、輸出 $3.75,比 gpt-5.6-sol 的 $5 和 $30 輸入便宜約 6.7 倍、輸出便宜約 8 倍。需要單次回覆最多 128000 輸出 token,或需要關閉思考的能力,且文字加影像輸入就夠時選 gpt-5.6-sol。

定價

Gemini 3.7 Flash GPT-5.6 Sol Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $0.75 $5 0.15×
輸出 / 1M tokens $3.75 $30 0.13×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.075 $0.5 0.15×
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 63 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

Gemini 3.7 Flash · $0.75 GPT-5.6 Sol · $5
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

Gemini 3.7 Flash GPT-5.6 Sol
工具使用
思考控制 是 —— 廠商未公布調節參數 可配置
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 5–10m, up to 1h
最小快取前綴 4096 個 token 1024 個 token

規格

Gemini 3.7 Flash GPT-5.6 Sol
輸入模態 文字 影像 音訊 影片 文字 影像
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-08-13 2026-07-09
知識截止日期 2026-02
上下文視窗 1M 1.1M
最大輸出 66K 128K
思考參數 reasoning.effort
可接受的值
reasoning.effort
  • none
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
預設值 medium

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: Gemini 3.7 Flash · GPT-5.6 Sol

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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate a high volume of invisible "thinking tokens" behind the scenes to deliberate and solve complex logic before delivering a final response. Because our vendor bills strictly on token volume, this additional internal computation effectively doubled our billable output per query. In short, our costs increased because we are now paying for the extra compute capacity required to produce significantly higher-accuracy answers.

輸出 878 tok (+799 思考) 延遲 6.9 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model generate additional internal tokens before producing an answer, so each request consumes more billable compute. Reasoning may also increase response length, latency, tool calls, and retries, further raising per-request cost. In short, usage volume may be unchanged, but the cost per task increased enough to double the bill.

輸出 111 tok (+34 思考) 延遲 2.3 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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 8/8 cases

Here is the corrected function: ```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 ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function tracked equal adjacent transitions instead of the actual number of elements in a run, causing all non-empty run lengths to be undercounted by one (e.g., returning `0` instead of `1` for single-element lists because the loop never executes, and `1` instead of `2` for pairs). Initializing both `best` and `cur` to `1` (after handling empty inputs) and resetting `cur` to `1` on a mismatch ensures every individual element is counted as a valid run of at least length one.

輸出 1050 tok (+827 思考) 延遲 6.4 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通過 · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 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 original function counted equal *adjacencies* rather than items, so a run of length one produced `0` and every longer run was undercounted by one. Initializing `cur` and `best` to `1` for nonempty input makes them represent item counts, resetting `cur` to `1` starts a new run at the current item, and updating `best` on every iteration ensures a run reaching the final index is included.

輸出 316 tok (+135 思考) 延遲 5.2 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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": "withheld" } ```

輸出 918 tok (+858 思考) 延遲 6.2 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":"11+","guidance":"withheld pending the Q4 close"}

輸出 194 tok (+147 思考) 延遲 3.2 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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Why pay twice for identical AI queries simply because you routed them to different model vendors? Today, we introduce Universal Prompt Caching directly within our unified API gateway architecture. This capability stores repeated prompt contexts across OpenAI, Anthropic, and local models, instantly returning stored results to eliminate redundant computation fees. When your application sends an LLM request, the gateway inspects the payload, identifies semantic matches, and returns accurate cached responses in under ten milliseconds. Engineering teams can now slash inference latency by eighty percent while dramatically reducing monthly token expenditures across diverse production deployments. You retain complete privacy control, flexible cache eviction policies, and granular metrics through a single dashboard. Update your routing settings today to accelerate overall system performance.

輸出 2858 tok (+2718 思考) 延遲 14.1 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today, we’re introducing Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that reuses prompt prefixes across supported AI providers, reducing latency, token costs, and duplicated processing. Teams can define cache policies once, route requests dynamically, and preserve provider flexibility without rewriting application logic. Switching models during testing or failover? The gateway identifies eligible prompt segments, applies provider-specific caching controls, and reports hits, misses, savings, and expiration details through unified logs and metrics. Configurable TTLs, tenant isolation, encryption, and cache-bypass options help teams balance performance, privacy, and freshness for every workload. Provider Prompt Cache is available today in beta through the dashboard and API, with SDK examples and migration guidance included. […]

輸出 733 tok (+564 思考) 延遲 7.7 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="gemini-3.7-flash",
    # model="gpt-5.6-sol",  # 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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GPT-5.6 Sol 哪個比較便宜?

Gemini 3.7 Flash 在 輸入 / 1m tokens 上較便宜($0.75 對比 $5,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 Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GPT-5.6 Sol 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。

Gemini 3.7 Flash 與 GPT-5.6 Sol 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