Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GLM-5.3-Flash

vs

什麼情況選哪一個

當你的輸入包含音訊時,請選擇 gemini-3.8-flash,因為它是兩者中唯一能在文字、圖片與影片之外接受音訊的模型,且具備稍微大一點的 1048576 token 上下文。若要以較低成本進行文字、圖片或影片工作,請選擇 glm-5.3-flash:其輸入為 $0.15、輸出為 $0.5,在輸入與輸出上分別比 gemini-3.8-flash 的 $0.75 與 $3.75 便宜 5 倍與 7.5 倍,最大輸出 token 數為 163840 對比 65536。請注意,glm-5.3-flash 無法停用思考,因此每次呼叫都需將推論 token 列入預算。

Benchmark 成績

高於平均沒有模型更高Gemini 3.8 Flash12 / 175 / 17GLM-5.3-Flash3 / 50 / 5
Gemini 3.8 Flash GLM-5.3-Flash 其他有成績的模型 其他模型平均 ★ 沒有模型分數更高
DeepSWE 1.1
73.7%
63.4%
BioMysteryBench hard
沒有模型分數更高 56.5%
N/A
OSWorld 2.0 Partial score, batch tool enabled
59%
N/A
HealthBench Professional
52.1%
N/A
Finance Agent v2
沒有模型分數更高 61.4%
N/A
Legal Agent Benchmark
10%
N/A
GPQA Diamond
95.3%
N/A
Agents' Last Exam
N/A
26.3%
CharXiv (RQ) no tools
沒有模型分數更高 86.2%
N/A

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

定價

Gemini 3.8 Flash GLM-5.3-Flash Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $0.75 $0.15 5×
輸出 / 1M tokens $3.75 $0.5 7.5×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.075 $0.03 2.5×

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 80 個聊天模型(對數尺度)

Gemini 3.8 Flash · $0.75 GLM-5.3-Flash · $0.15
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

功能

Gemini 3.8 Flash GLM-5.3-Flash
工具使用 是 是
思考控制 是,但供應商未公布調整參數 一律開啟
結構化輸出 是 是
提示詞快取 隱式 + 顯式 隱式(自動)
快取存活時間 未公布 未公布
最小快取前綴 4,096 個 token 未公布

規格

Gemini 3.8 Flash GLM-5.3-Flash
輸入模態 文字 圖像 音訊 影片 文字 圖像 影片
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-09-02 2026-08-26
知識截止日期 2026-03 -
上下文視窗 1M 1M
最大輸出 66K 164K
思考參數 - reasoning_effort
可接受的值 -
reasoning_effort
  • low
  • high
  • max
預設值 - max

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: Gemini 3.8 Flash · GLM-5.3-Flash

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

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通過 · 3 sentences

When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating hidden "thinking tokens" to work through logic step-by-step before producing a final answer. Because AI vendors bill for every single token processed—visible or not—this internal deliberation dramatically inflated our billable volume per query. In short, while our total number of user requests remained flat, the cost per transaction doubled to buy higher accuracy on complex tasks.

輸出 705 tok (+624 思考) 延遲 6.4 s

GLM-5.3-Flash 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning means the model now generates thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens before each visible answer, and we're billed for those hidden tokens at full output rates—our most expensive tier. Since output tokens cost 3–5x more than input tokens, that hidden thinking volume compounds across every request, which is why the bill doubled rather than edged up. If the spend concerns you, the fix is straightforward: route only complex queries to reasoning models and keep simple tasks on standard ones, which can reclaim a meaningful share of that cost without losing accuracy where it matters.

輸出 742 tok (+626 思考) 延遲 23.2 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

Gemini 3.8 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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function counted equal-neighbor transitions rather than the actual items making up each run. Because `cur` started at `0` (and was reset to `0` on mismatches), every run was undercounted by one: single-element lists returned `0` because the loop never executed, and any subsequent run—including those ending at the last index—recorded a count of $N - 1$ instead of $N$. The fix handles empty input upfront, initializes both `cur` and `best` to `1` (since any single element forms a run of length 1), and resets `cur` to `1` whenever a new run begins.

輸出 1393 tok (+1149 思考) 延遲 10.1 s

GLM-5.3-Flash 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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` **The bug:** `cur` is supposed to hold the length of the current run, but it's seeded with `0` and reset to `0` on a mismatch instead of `1` — and since the loop starts at index 1, the first element of every run never passes through the `==` branch and so never gets counted at all. That means `cur` actually holds *run length minus 1* for every run, so every run is underreported by one: a single-element input never enters the loop and returns 0 instead of 1, and a run of length n returns n − 1 (e.g., `[3, 3, 3]` returns 2). […]

輸出 2462 tok (+2138 思考) 延遲 29.1 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

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

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

輸出 3989 tok (+3932 思考) 延遲 30.4 s

GLM-5.3-Flash 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending the Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: revenue of 412 is on a constant-currency basis as stated; growth of "eleven and change" is approximated as 11 since no precise figure is given.

輸出 717 tok (+616 思考) 延遲 9.1 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

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Why pay multiple model providers for the exact same output? Introducing Universal Prompt Cache, our latest API gateway capability engineered to cut compute expenses and drop inference latency. When your application makes a call, the gateway inspects a central memory layer before routing traffic to external LLMs. If an identical query was previously processed by OpenAI, Anthropic, or Mistral, our gateway returns that response immediately. This shared cache eliminates duplicate token fees and insulates your production apps from vendor rate limits or unexpected downtime. Developers can easily customize expiration settings, enforce strict data privacy controls, and configure invalidation logic across every endpoint. Stop wasting your budget on repeated queries. Enable prompt caching in your dashboard to accelerate your pipeline today.

輸出 3833 tok (+3688 思考) 延遲 21.8 s

GLM-5.3-Flash 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, the newest feature in our API gateway. Today, teams send identical prompts to multiple LLM providers and pay full price each time. Why duplicate that work and cost? With Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, your gateway stores prompt-response pairs and serves repeated requests from cache, regardless of which provider handles the call. The result: lower latency, reduced spend, and consistent outputs across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Configure cache policies per route, set TTLs, and invalidate entries instantly through the dashboard or API. Built-in analytics show hit rates and savings in real time. Enable the cache with a single flag, no code changes required. Available today on all paid plans. Contact sales for enterprise volume pricing details.

輸出 2095 tok (+1937 思考) 延遲 20.2 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="gemini-3.8-flash",
    # model="glm-5.3-flash",  # 取消這一行的註解,並把上一行註解掉
    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 3.8 Flash 和 GLM-5.3-Flash 哪個比較便宜?

以「輸入 / 1M tokens」來看,GLM-5.3-Flash 比較便宜($0.15 對 $0.75,相差 5.0×)。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 Gemini 3.8 Flash 和 GLM-5.3-Flash 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。

Gemini 3.8 Flash 與 GLM-5.3-Flash 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