新用戶 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

GPT-6.1 Sol vs Qwen3.8 Max

vs

何時用哪一個

兩者皆接受文字和影像輸入、回傳文字,並收取相同的每百萬個輸入 token $2,因此差異在於輸出和快取:gpt-6.1-sol 收費為每百萬輸出 $10(約為 qwen3.8-max $6 的 1.67x),但快取讀取為 $0.1 對比 $0.25,便宜了 2.5x。若需繁重輸出的生成工作及其稍大的 131072 最大輸出,加上 983616 個 token 視窗的長上下文旗標,請選擇 qwen3.8-max。若為高度依賴快取、重複使用提示詞的工作負載及更寬的 1050000 個 token 上下文,請選擇 gpt-6.1-sol,但請留意其推理無法停用。

Benchmark 成績

GPT-6.1 Sol:廠商沒有公布過 benchmark 成績。

高於同儕均值無人分數更高Qwen3.8 Max31 / 408 / 40
GPT-6.1 Sol Qwen3.8 Max 其他被測模型 同儕均值 ★ 無人分數更高
SWE-Bench Pro
N/A
67.7%
AndroidBench
N/A
75.1%
Cybergym
N/A
78.5%
HealthBench
N/A
無人分數更高 60.2%
JobBench
N/A
53.4%
PLawBench
N/A
無人分數更高 73.2%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
92.6%
Agents' Last Exam
N/A
27%

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

定價

GPT-6.1 Sol 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 不額外計費 1.25x -

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 76 個 聊天 模型的 每 1M tokens 的輸入價格(對數尺度)

GPT-6.1 Sol · $2 Qwen3.8 Max · $2
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

GPT-6.1 Sol Qwen3.8 Max
工具使用 是 是
思考控制 常駐開啟 是 —— 廠商未公布調節參數
結構化輸出 是 是
提示快取 隱式(自動) 隱式 + 顯式
快取生命週期 5-10m, up to 1h explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小快取前綴 1024 個 token 1024 個 token

規格

GPT-6.1 Sol Qwen3.8 Max
輸入模態 文字 影像 文字 影像
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-09-29 2026-08-03
知識截止日期 2026-04 -
上下文視窗 1.1M 984K
最大輸出 128K 131K
思考參數 reasoning.effort -
可接受的值
reasoning.effort
  • 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: GPT-6.1 Sol · Qwen3.8 Max

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

GPT-6.1 Sol 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model do more computational work before answering, and many providers bill the resulting reasoning tokens even though users never see them. That means the same number of requests can cost twice as much because each request consumes more billable tokens, even if the visible answers stay the same length. We should confirm the increase in our usage breakdown and reserve higher reasoning levels for tasks where the improvement justifies the added cost.

輸出 144 tok (+54 思考) 延遲 6.6 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

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

GPT-6.1 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 counts equal adjacent pairs rather than items in a run: a run of length `n` has only `n - 1` equal pairs, so a single-element input returns `0`, and a run ending at the last index is also undercounted. It does process the last index, so the issue is not a missing final check. Initializing each nonempty run to `1` and updating `best` after every iteration correctly counts items, including singleton and trailing runs; empty inputs still return `0`.

輸出 189 tok 延遲 6.3 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

GPT-6.1 Sol 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"

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

輸出 345 tok (+285 思考) 延遲 10.2 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

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

GPT-6.1 Sol 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that stores reusable prompts and manages caching across your supported AI providers. Why rebuild the same context every time your application switches models? With one configuration, teams can reuse shared instructions, standardize cache policies, and reduce repeated prompt processing wherever provider caching is available. The gateway handles provider-specific requirements while giving you clear visibility into cache hits, usage, and estimated savings. Set expiration windows, isolate cached content by project, and invalidate entries when prompts change. Your existing routing logic stays intact, so you can compare models without rebuilding your caching workflow. […]

輸出 588 tok (+435 思考) 延遲 13.9 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

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="gpt-6.1-sol",
    # model="qwen3.8-max",  # 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

GPT-6.1 Sol 和 Qwen3.8 Max 哪個比較便宜?

兩者列出的 輸入 / 1m tokens 相同($2),因此價格無法決定勝負 — 請參閱下方的規格與功能。

我可以在不進行兩次整合的情況下,對 GPT-6.1 Sol 和 Qwen3.8 Max 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。

GPT-6.1 Sol 與 Qwen3.8 Max 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