Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash
什么时候选哪个
两者均具备 1,000,000 token 的上下文窗口,因此区分点在于成本和输入:qwen3.8-flash 的输入为 $0.15,输出为 $0.47,而 claude-sonnet-5-5 为 $2 和 $10,大约便宜了 13x 和 21x,且前者的缓存读取为 $0.016,后者为 $0.1。对于大体量或长上下文的工作,在文本和图像之外需要视频输入时,或者当你需要完全关闭思考功能(claude-sonnet-5-5 不允许这样做)时,请选择 qwen3.8-flash。如果你需要 Anthropic 较新的 2026-09-28 版本来处理文本和图像任务,并能接受较高的费率,请选择 claude-sonnet-5-5。
Benchmark 成绩
Claude Sonnet 5.5:供应商没有公布 benchmark 成绩。
供应商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
价格
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 输入 / 1M token | $2 | $0.15 | 13× |
| 输出 / 1M token | $10 | $0.47 | 21× |
| 缓存读取 / 1M token | $0.1 | $0.016 | 6.3× |
| 缓存写入 | 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) | 1.25x | - |
价格取自构建时的实时目录,最新价格见各模型页面。
两个模型所处的位置:全部 77 个按同一单位计费的聊天模型的每 1M token 输入价分布(对数刻度)
能力
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| 工具调用 | 是 | 是 |
| 思考控制 | 始终开启 | 可配置 |
| 结构化输出 | 是 | 是 |
| 提示词缓存 | 显式(由你标记前缀) | 隐式 + 显式 |
| 缓存有效期 | 5m default, 1h option | explicit: 5m, reset on hit |
| 最小缓存前缀 | 1024 个 token | 1024 个 token |
规格
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Qwen3.8 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| 输入模态 | 文本 图像 | 文本 图像 视频 |
| 输出模态 | 文本 | 文本 |
| 发布日期 | 2026-09-28 | 2026-08-27 |
| 知识截止日期 | 2026-06 | - |
| 上下文窗口 | 1M | 1M |
| 最大输出 | 128K | 131K |
| 思考参数 | thinking.type |
|
| 可选值 | thinking.type
| enable_thinking
thinking_budget
preserve_thinking
|
| 默认值 | adaptive, effort high | on qwen3.8-flash is hybrid thinking with thinking enabled by default, thinking_budget defaults to the 262,144-token chain maximum, and preserve_thinking is off |
规格照录自各供应商的文档;供应商没有公布的项目,对应的行直接省略,不做推断。 完整来源: Claude Sonnet 5.5 · Qwen3.8 Flash
同一条提示词,两个模型,经网关实测
Claude Sonnet 5.5 通过 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning makes the model "think" before it answers, and that internal thinking is generated as extra text (reasoning tokens) that we are billed for at the same rate as output tokens, even though users never see it. Output tokens also cost several times more than input tokens, so a single request that used to produce a short answer can now generate many times more billable text behind the scenes. Because our request volume and prompts didn't change, the doubling comes almost entirely from this hidden thinking, and we can bring it down by limiting reasoning effort, turning it off for simple tasks, and reserving it for the workloads where the accuracy gain justifies the cost.
输出 205 tok 延迟 3.6 s
Qwen3.8 Flash 通过 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning makes the model spend additional output tokens to plan and validate answers before responding, and those tokens are billed. It also increases compute and latency per request, so each task consumes more capacity than a non-reasoning call. As a result, billable tokens and compute roughly doubled, directly driving the higher invoice.
输出 330 tok (+262 思考) 延迟 8.9 s
指令遵循(恰好三句,数得出来)、受众适配(对 CFO 说话的口吻),以及下方 token 计数暴露出的隐藏思考计费差额。
Claude Sonnet 5.5 通过 · 8/8 cases
**The bug:** `cur` counts the number of *adjacent equal pairs* rather than the number of items in the run. A run of length k contains only k−1 such pairs, so every result is one too small. The counter also starts at 0 and the loop starts at index 1, so a single-element list never updates `best` and returns 0 instead of 1. (An empty list should return 0.) In addition, `cur` resets to 0 on a mismatch, when it should reset to 1, because the item at `xs[i]` begins a new run of length 1. The claim that it "misses runs ending at the last index" is really the same off-by-one: the final run is counted, but as one less than its true length. Because `best` is updated inside the loop on every extension, the last run isn't skipped. […]
输出 444 tok 延迟 6.7 s
Qwen3.8 Flash 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 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that the original version counts adjacent equal pairs rather than items in a run, starting both `cur` and `best` at `0`, and it resets `cur` to `0` after a mismatch, thereby discarding the first element of the new run. That makes single-element inputs return `0`, and because every run is effectively measured in “steps” between equal elements, the last element is not counted—particularly noticeable when the longest run ends at the final index.
输出 2123 tok (+1933 思考) 延迟 43.8 s
修复是否真的正确(能运行)、解释的信息密度,以及在一个范围明确的任务上的 token 效率。
Claude Sonnet 5.5 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null
Here is the extracted JSON: ```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on the choices: - **quarter**: The text says "September quarter" without specifying a fiscal year or Q-number, so I kept the wording as stated. - **revenue_usd_m**: The text gives "412" for the topline, with no currency or unit stated explicitly. I've taken it as 412 million USD per the field definition, but the text does not confirm that, and the figure is constant-currency. - **growth_pct**: "Eleven and change" means slightly above 11, so 11 is an approximation. The exact figure isn't given. - **guidance**: Guidance is withheld pending the Q4 close, so no guidance is stated, hence null.
输出 300 tok 延迟 3.5 s
Qwen3.8 Flash 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }
输出 519 tok (+463 思考) 延迟 10.5 s
是否严守 schema(不臆造字段)、能否顶住幻觉压力(原文明说暂不给出 guidance),以及结构化输出路径的差异。
Claude Sonnet 5.5 通过 · 122 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** Your API gateway now caches prompts across every connected LLM provider, whether you route traffic to OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, or a self-hosted model. Here's how it works: the gateway fingerprints each prompt prefix, stores it centrally, and applies the right provider-specific caching mechanism automatically. When you switch providers or fail over during an outage, your cached context follows you. Early testing shows input token costs dropping by up to 70% on repeated system prompts and long documents, with latency improvements of 40% or more on cache hits. Tired of paying to send the same instructions thousands of times a day? Enable it with one configuration flag. Cache rules, TTLs, and per-team isolation are available in the dashboard today.
输出 266 tok 延迟 3.8 s
Qwen3.8 Flash 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
We are announcing prompt caching across providers in our API gateway. Store approved prompt outputs once and reuse them across supported model providers, cutting latency, cost, and duplicate token spend. The feature matches identical requests, checks validity, and returns cached results while preserving routing controls. Developers keep existing endpoints; the gateway manages storage, invalidation, and provider differences. This reduces noisy repeat calls, improves steady responses, and frees teams to focus on better agent workflows. OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, Mistral, and custom routes are supported. Cache hits appear in analytics with latency, token, and cost reductions visible. Check retention and privacy rules before enabling it. Ready to add cache controls to your gateway? Enable it in settings and watch spend drop now.
输出 5958 tok (+5805 思考) 延迟 88.8 s
是否守住约束(字数预算、禁用词表、只能有一个问句)、文风特征,以及长度控制。
改一行代码就能在两个模型之间切换
下方每个标签页里都有两个模型 ID,高亮的那两行是唯一要改的地方。端点不变,API key 不变,请求结构也不变。
from openai import OpenAI
client = OpenAI(
base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
api_key="sk-syn-...",
)
resp = client.chat.completions.create(
model="claude-sonnet-5-5",
# model="qwen3.8-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)import OpenAI from "openai";
const client = new OpenAI({
baseURL: "https://synthorai.io/v1",
apiKey: "sk-syn-...",
});
const resp = await client.chat.completions.create({
model: "claude-sonnet-5-5",
// model: "qwen3.8-flash", // 取消注释此行,注释上一行
messages: [{ role: "user", content: "Summarize this diff" }],
reasoning_effort: "medium",
});
console.log(resp.choices[0].message.content);curl https://synthorai.io/v1/chat/completions \
-H "Authorization: Bearer sk-syn-..." \
-H "Content-Type: application/json" \
-d '{
"model": "claude-sonnet-5-5",
# "model": "qwen3.8-flash", # 取消注释此行,注释上一行
"messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Hello"}],
"reasoning_effort": "medium"
}'package main
import (
"context"
"fmt"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3"
"github.com/openai/openai-go/v3/option"
)
func main() {
client := openai.NewClient(
option.WithBaseURL("https://synthorai.io/v1"),
option.WithAPIKey("sk-syn-..."),
)
resp, _ := client.Chat.Completions.New(context.TODO(), openai.ChatCompletionNewParams{
Model: "claude-sonnet-5-5",
// Model: "qwen3.8-flash", // 取消注释此行,注释上一行
Messages: []openai.ChatCompletionMessageParamUnion{
openai.UserMessage("Summarize this diff"),
},
ReasoningEffort: openai.ReasoningEffortMedium,
})
fmt.Println(resp.Choices[0].Message.Content)
}import com.openai.client.OpenAIClient;
import com.openai.client.okhttp.OpenAIOkHttpClient;
import com.openai.models.chat.completions.*;
import com.openai.models.ReasoningEffort;
OpenAIClient client = OpenAIOkHttpClient.builder()
.baseUrl("https://synthorai.io/v1")
.apiKey("sk-syn-...")
.build();
ChatCompletion resp = client.chat().completions().create(
ChatCompletionCreateParams.builder()
.model("claude-sonnet-5-5")
// .model("qwen3.8-flash") // 取消注释此行,注释上一行
.addUserMessage("Summarize this diff")
.reasoningEffort(ReasoningEffort.MEDIUM)
.build());
System.out.println(resp.choices().get(0).message().content().orElse(""));常见问题
Claude Sonnet 5.5 和 Qwen3.8 Flash 哪个更便宜?
按「输入 / 1M token」算,Qwen3.8 Flash 更便宜($0.15 对 $2,相差 13×)。其他计费项的结论可能相反,完整价格见上方表格,实际成本取决于你的用量构成。
不用分别集成两次,就能对 Claude Sonnet 5.5 和 Qwen3.8 Flash 做 A/B 测试吗?
可以。两个模型走同一个 OpenAI 兼容端点,用同一个 API key,切换时只要改一行里的模型名,所以可以给两个模型各分一部分流量,直接对比账单。
Claude Sonnet 5.5 和 Qwen3.8 Flash 支持提示词缓存吗?
支持。两个模型的缓存读取价都低于各自的输入价,所以前缀能反复命中缓存的负载,实际成本会比按官网价估算的低。具体的缓存读取价见上方价格表。