新帳號 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Gemini 4 Argon vs Qwen3.8 Max

vs

什麼情況選哪一個

兩者的輸入計費皆為每百萬 token $2,因此差異在於後續操作:gemini-4-argon 的輸出為每百萬 token $10,而 qwen3.8-max 為 $6;但在快取讀取方面,前者為 $0.1,後者為 $0.25,這使得 gemini-4-argon 在重度依賴快取、以讀取為主的 pipeline 中成為更便宜的選擇。當您需要文字與圖片之外的音訊或視訊輸入,且需要 1048576 個 token 的上下文時,請選擇 gemini-4-argon。如果是單次回覆較長的圖文任務,請選擇 qwen3.8-max,因為它支援 131072 個輸出 token (是 gemini-4-argon 65536 的兩倍),且輸出費率較低。

Benchmark 成績

Gemini 4 Argon:供應商沒有公布 benchmark 成績。

高於平均沒有模型更高Qwen3.8 Max31 / 408 / 40
Gemini 4 Argon Qwen3.8 Max 其他有成績的模型 其他模型平均 ★ 沒有模型分數更高
SWE-Bench Pro
N/A
67.7%
AndroidBench
N/A
75.1%
Cybergym
N/A
78.5%
HealthBench
N/A
沒有模型分數更高 60.2%
JobBench
N/A
53.4%
PLawBench
N/A
沒有模型分數更高 73.2%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
92.6%
Agents' Last Exam
N/A
27%

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

定價

Gemini 4 Argon Qwen3.8 Max Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $2 $2 =
輸出 / 1M tokens $10 $6 1.7×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.1 $0.25 0.4×
快取寫入 - 1.25x -

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 79 個聊天模型(對數尺度)

功能

Gemini 4 Argon Qwen3.8 Max
工具使用 是 是
思考控制 是,但供應商未公布調整參數 是,但供應商未公布調整參數
結構化輸出 是 是
提示詞快取 隱式 + 顯式 隱式 + 顯式
快取存活時間 未公布 explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小快取前綴 4096 個 token 1024 個 token

規格

Gemini 4 Argon Qwen3.8 Max
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 2026-10-13 2026-08-03
知識截止日期 2026-03 -
上下文視窗 1M 984K
最大輸出 66K 131K

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 4 Argon · Qwen3.8 Max

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 4 Argon 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling the reasoning feature forces the AI to generate an extensive, hidden "chain of thought" to solve complex problems before delivering the final answer. Because LLM providers bill us per token generated, we are now paying for thousands of these invisible "thinking" words on top of the standard visible output. While this doubles our raw usage costs per query, it represents an investment in significantly higher accuracy and drastically reduced error rates for our most critical tasks.

輸出 91 tok 延遲 4.7 s

Qwen3.8 Max 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model produce additional hidden steps before responding, and those tokens are billable. It also tends to lengthen each interaction because the model works through more possibilities before settling on an answer. Therefore, the bill doubled mainly due to higher compute and token usage per request, not necessarily because the number of requests doubled.

輸出 378 tok (+305 思考) 延遲 8.6 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

Gemini 4 Argon 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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` The bug occurs because the original function counts the number of matching adjacent *pairs* rather than the actual number of *elements* in a run, causing all non-empty results to be off by one. Because a single element constitutes a valid run of length 1, initializing and resetting `cur` and `best` to `0` instead of `1` means the first element of any sequence is never counted; this causes single-element lists (where the loop doesn't run) to wrongly return `0` and makes it seem like runs at the end are missed because a pair of matching elements only increments `cur` to `1` instead of `2`. […]

輸出 286 tok 延遲 7.5 s

Qwen3.8 Max 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 bug is that the original code starts `best` and `cur` at `0`, so it counts adjacent equal *transitions* rather than the number of items in the run. A run of length `n` has only `n - 1` equal-neighbor transitions, so single-element inputs return `0`, and runs that reach the end are undercounted by one. Initializing the current run to `1` for the first element, resetting it to `1` on a break, and updating `best` from that count fixes the off-by-one.

輸出 1616 tok (+1411 思考) 延遲 34.7 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

Gemini 4 Argon 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": null, "growth_pct": "eleven and change", "guidance": "withheld pending the Q4 close" } ```

輸出 68 tok 延遲 5.8 s

Qwen3.8 Max 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

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

輸出 1199 tok (+1141 思考) 延遲 24.4 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 4 Argon 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Are you paying twice for the exact same AI responses? Today, we are introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching for our API gateway, a new feature designed to reduce your artificial intelligence infrastructure costs and latency. When your applications send identical prompts to different large language models, our gateway now intercepts the request and serves a verified, cached response in milliseconds. It works across OpenAI, Anthropic, and open-source models simultaneously. If your primary provider experiences an outage, your fallback model still benefits from the shared cache Layer, preventing expensive redundant computations. Engineering teams can configure custom time-to-live settings, set similarity thresholds, and monitor cache hit rates directly from the dashboard. Activate Cross-Provider Prompt Caching in your gateway settings today and start saving.

輸出 156 tok 延遲 6.3 s

Qwen3.8 Max 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today, our API gateway adds prompt caching across major model providers. It stores prompts and responses in one fast cache layer. Teams can lower token spend, reduce latency, and repeat reliable answers. The feature supports OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and Mistral through one configuration. You can set retention rules, scope access, and invalidate entries quickly. How does your team maintain consistent results during provider outages? Approved cached responses keep applications stable while fallback routes recover. The dashboard shows hit rates, savings, latency, and provider usage. Engineers receive audit trails for every cached prompt, enabling safer testing. Product managers can compare cost trends before and after cache adoption. Start with a small route, then safely expand caching to production traffic right now.

輸出 2744 tok (+2591 思考) 延遲 46.3 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-4-argon",
    # model="qwen3.8-max",  # 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 4 Argon 和 Qwen3.8 Max 哪個比較便宜?

兩者的「輸入 / 1M tokens」相同($2),這一項分不出高下,請看下方的規格與功能。

可以只串接一次,就對 Gemini 4 Argon 和 Qwen3.8 Max 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 4 Argon 與 Qwen3.8 Max 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