新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,免绑卡。

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash

vs

何时用哪一个

当您需要 claude-opus-5-5 始终开启的思考模式(无法禁用)和超长的单次生成时请选择它,因为它最多可输出 128000 个 token,而 gemini-3.8-flash 为 65536;在输入和输出上,每 token 的成本大约高 5.3 倍(每百万 $4 和 $20 对比 $0.75 和 $3.75)。对于稍大一点的 1048576 token 窗口上的大批量文本、图像、音频和视频输入,以及更便宜的缓存读取费率(每百万 $0.075 对比 $0.2),请选择 gemini-3.8-flash。两者都是 2026 年底发布的模型,具备工具、代码和推理功能,因此区别真正体现为模态、价格与输出长度的权衡。

Benchmark 成绩

高于同侪均值无人分数更高Claude Opus 5.59 / 97 / 9Gemini 3.8 Flash12 / 175 / 17
Claude Opus 5.5 Gemini 3.8 Flash 其他被测模型 同侪均值 无人分数更高
Terminal-bench 4.0
无人分数更高 66.4%
19.1%
BioMysteryBench hard
N/A
无人分数更高 56.5%
OSWorld 2.0 Partial score, batch tool enabled
N/A
59%
HealthBench Professional
N/A
52.1%
Finance Agent v2
N/A
无人分数更高 61.4%
Legal Agent Benchmark
N/A
10%
GPQA Diamond
N/A
95.3%
AutomationBench
40%
N/A
CharXiv (RQ) no tools
N/A
无人分数更高 86.2%

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

定价

Claude Opus 5.5 Gemini 3.8 Flash Δ
输入 / 1M tokens $4 $0.75 5.3×
输出 / 1M tokens $20 $3.75 5.3×
缓存读取 / 1M tokens $0.2 $0.075 2.7×
缓存写入 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) - -

费率取自构建时的实时目录;每个模型页面均附有当前的费率卡。

它们的位置 — 以该计费单位计费的所有 74 个 聊天 模型的 每 1M token 的输入价格(对数刻度)

能力

Claude Opus 5.5 Gemini 3.8 Flash
工具使用
思考控制 始终开启 是 —— 厂商未公布调节参数
结构化输出
提示词缓存 显式(由您标记前缀) 隐式 + 显式
缓存生存时间 5m default, 1h option 未公开
最小缓存前缀 1024 个 token 4096 个 token

规格

Claude Opus 5.5 Gemini 3.8 Flash
输入模态 文本 图像 文本 图像 音频 视频
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-09-22 2026-09-02
知识截止日期 2026-06 2026-03
上下文窗口 1M 1M
最大输出 128K 66K
思考参数 output_config.effort -
允许的值
output_config.effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
-
默认值 medium -

规格转录自各供应商的文档;若供应商未发布某项数据,则直接省略该行,而非进行推断。 完整来源: Claude Opus 5.5 · Gemini 3.8 Flash

单个 Prompt,两个模型 —— 通过网关实测

提示词 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 检查 恰好 3 句

Claude Opus 5.5 通过 · 3 sentences

When we turned on reasoning, the model began "thinking out loud" before each answer, generating thousands of internal working tokens that users never see but that we are billed for just like the final response. Those hidden tokens are charged at the output rate, typically the most expensive rate, so the same question with the same visible answer now costs roughly twice as much or more. We can bring the bill back down without losing the quality gains by capping the reasoning budget and reserving reasoning mode for the complex tasks that actually benefit from it.

输出 263 tok (+102 思考) 延迟 5.7 s

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通过 · 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.

输出 705 tok (+624 思考) 延迟 6.4 s

指令遵循(恰好三句,可数)、受众适配(面向 CFO 的语气),以及下方 token 计量所暴露的隐藏思考计费缺口。

提示词 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. 检查 修复通过测试

Claude Opus 5.5 通过 · 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 ``` **Explanation:** The original code counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *items in a run*. Both `cur` and `best` started at 0, and `cur` reset to 0 on a mismatch, so a run of length *n* was reported as *n − 1*. For a single-element list the loop never executes, so it returned 0 instead of 1. For `[5, 5]` it returned 1 instead of 2. The fix treats every element as the start of a run of length 1: `best` and `cur` start at 1, and `cur` resets to 1 (not 0) when the value changes. An explicit check returns 0 for an empty list. The "misses runs at the last index" reports are the same off-by-one bug rather than a separate one. […]

输出 723 tok (+303 思考) 延迟 10.4 s

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通过 · 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.

输出 1393 tok (+1149 思考) 延迟 10.1 s

修复是否真的正确(可运行)、解释的信息密度,以及在一个边界明确的任务上的 token 效率。

提示词 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. 检查 合法 JSON,schema 精确

Claude Opus 5.5 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` **Judgment calls to check:** - **quarter**: Kept as "September quarter" rather than "Q3", since the fiscal calendar isn't stated. The text mentions an upcoming "Q4 close," so it may be fiscal Q3, but that's not certain. - **revenue_usd_m**: The text says only "412 for the topline." It doesn't state currency or units, and the figure is on a constant-currency basis, not reported USD. USD millions is an assumption. Use `null` if you need strictly stated values. - **growth_pct**: The source says "eleven and change," so the true figure is slightly above 11. 11 is an approximation. - **guidance**: Guidance was explicitly withheld. I recorded that rather than `null`, since the text addresses it directly.

输出 829 tok (+488 思考) 延迟 10.9 s

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

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

输出 3989 tok (+3932 思考) 延迟 30.4 s

schema 服从度(不臆造字段)、幻觉压力(guidance 明确被暂缓给出),以及结构化输出路径的差异。

提示词 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. 检查 120 词,0 个禁用词

Claude Opus 5.5 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we're launching Cross-Provider Prompt Caching for our API gateway. Why pay twice for the same context? Our gateway now stores repeated prompt prefixes, system instructions, and document chunks, then reuses them whether your request goes to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or an open-source model. Teams running retrieval pipelines or long agent loops can cut token costs by up to 60 percent and trim latency on every cached call. Setup takes one configuration flag; no code changes are required. Cache rules respect tenant boundaries, expire on your schedule, and log every hit for audit review. Dashboards show savings by provider, route, and application in real time. Cross-Provider Prompt Caching is available on all Pro and Enterprise plans. Turn it on today.

输出 1263 tok (+1007 思考) 延迟 13.5 s

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通过 · 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.

输出 3833 tok (+3688 思考) 延迟 21.8 s

约束服从度(字数预算、禁用词表、唯一的那句问句)、文风指纹,以及长度控制。

只需一行代码即可在它们之间切换

两个 ID 都包含在下方的每个选项卡中 — 高亮显示的两行是唯一的修改。相同的端点,相同的密钥,相同的请求结构。

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-opus-5-5",
    # model="gemini-3.8-flash",  # 取消注释此行,注释上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

获取 API 密钥 →

常见问题

Claude Opus 5.5 和 Gemini 3.8 Flash 哪个更便宜?

在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面,Gemini 3.8 Flash 更便宜($0.75 对比 $4,相差 5.3×)。其他行可能得出相反的结论——上方表格提供了完整信息,实际成本取决于你的组合使用情况。

我可以在不进行两次集成的情况下,对 Claude Opus 5.5 和 Gemini 3.8 Flash 进行 A/B 测试吗?

可以。两者均通过同一个兼容 OpenAI 的端点提供服务,并使用同一把 API 密钥——切换只需更改一行模型字符串,因此你可以将一部分流量路由到各个模型并直接比较账单。

Claude Opus 5.5 和 Gemini 3.8 Flash 支持提示词缓存吗?

是的 —— 两者对缓存读取的计费均低于其输入费率,因此热前缀工作负载的成本低于标价。准确的缓存读取行位于上方的定价表中。

相关对比

来自我们的实测研究