新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,无需绑卡。

Claude Sonnet 5 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash

vs

什么时候选哪个

gemini-3.7-flash 在输入和输出上都比 claude-sonnet-5 低约 2.7 倍(输入 $0.75 对 $2、输出 $3.75 对 $10、缓存读取 $0.075 对 $0.2),并且在文本和图像之外还接受音频和视频,所以在 1048576 token 窗口上做低成本大批量工作或混合媒体输入时选它。需要长生成时选 claude-sonnet-5,它 128000 token 的最大输出约为 Flash 那款 65536 的两倍;或者当它可按请求关闭的思考能力符合你的控制需求时。上下文窗口两边基本相当,都在一百万 token 左右。

Benchmark 成绩

领先高于同类均值无更高分Claude Sonnet 544 / 221 / 22Gemini 3.7 Flash1817 / 243 / 24

22 项两边都有成绩。

Claude Sonnet 5 Gemini 3.7 Flash 其他参测模型 同类均值 ★ 没有模型得分更高
DeepSWE 1.1
53.8%
65.3%
BioMysteryBench hard
34.1%
43.5%
OSWorld 2.0 Partial score, batch tool enabled
42.6%
50.6%
Finance Agent v2
53.9%
59%
Harvey Lab-AA
90.1%
90.7%
HLE-Verified
31%
53.6%
AutomationBench
10.7%
30.4%
LVBench
68.5%
没有模型得分更高 85.4%

供应商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic DeepSeek Google Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

价格

Claude Sonnet 5 Gemini 3.7 Flash Δ
输入 / 1M token $2 $0.75 2.7×
输出 / 1M token $10 $3.75 2.7×
缓存读取 / 1M token $0.2 $0.075 2.7×
缓存写入 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) - -

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 76 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 Gemini 3.7 Flash
工具调用 是 是
思考控制 可配置 是,但供应商未公布调节参数
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 未公布
最小缓存前缀 1024 个 token 4096 个 token

规格

Claude Sonnet 5 Gemini 3.7 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 2026-06-30 2026-08-13
知识截止日期 2026-01 2026-03
上下文窗口 1M 1M
最大输出 128K 66K
思考参数
  • thinking.type "adaptive"
  • output_config.effort
-
可选值
thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max

"enabled" returns 400

-
默认值

thinking on (adaptive)

effort
  • high
-

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 · Gemini 3.7 Flash

同一条提示词,两个模型,经网关实测

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 Sonnet 5 通过 · 3 sentences

Reasoning mode works by having the model generate extended internal "thinking" steps before producing its final answer, and since we're billed on total tokens, that hidden reasoning text adds significantly to what we pay for—even though you never see it in the output. This is different from simply getting longer visible responses; the model is essentially "showing its work" behind the scenes, and complex prompts can trigger thousands of extra reasoning tokens per request. The upside is improved accuracy on complex tasks, but if we want to control costs, we should selectively enable reasoning only for queries that truly need it, rather than applying it universally.

输出 194 tok 延迟 4.3 s

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate a high volume of invisible "thinking tokens" behind the scenes to deliberate and solve complex logic before delivering a final response. Because our vendor bills strictly on token volume, this additional internal computation effectively doubled our billable output per query. In short, our costs increased because we are now paying for the extra compute capacity required to produce significantly higher-accuracy answers.

输出 878 tok (+799 思考) 延迟 6.9 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。

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 Sonnet 5 通过 · 8/8 cases

## The Bug The function has two related off-by-one issues rooted in the same cause: `cur` and `best` are initialized to `0` instead of `1`, treating run lengths as the number of *matches* between adjacent elements rather than the number of *elements* in the run. This means a single-element input never enters the loop (since `range(1, 1)` is empty) and returns `0` instead of the correct answer of `1`. It also means that for any input, the run length is undercounted by exactly one — a run of 3 equal elements only produces 2 "match" increments, so `best` ends up as 2 instead of 3. The claim that it "misses runs that end at the last index" is actually a symptom of this same undercount: the logic does update `best` correctly on every iteration (including the last), but because it's counting matches instead of elements, the final reported value is always one less than the true longest run. […]

输出 536 tok 延迟 7.1 s

Gemini 3.7 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 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function tracked equal adjacent transitions instead of the actual number of elements in a run, causing all non-empty run lengths to be undercounted by one (e.g., returning `0` instead of `1` for single-element lists because the loop never executes, and `1` instead of `2` for pairs). Initializing both `best` and `cur` to `1` (after handling empty inputs) and resetting `cur` to `1` on a mismatch ensures every individual element is counted as a valid run of at least length one.

输出 1050 tok (+827 思考) 延迟 6.4 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。

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,严格符合 schema

Claude Sonnet 5 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11.5, "guidance": null } ```

输出 348 tok 延迟 5.3 s

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"

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

输出 918 tok (+858 思考) 延迟 6.2 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。

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 Sonnet 5 通过 · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question

## Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching We're rolling out a new caching layer for our API gateway that works across every major LLM provider you connect through it. Instead of resending identical prompts and paying full price each time, the gateway recognizes repeated requests and serves cached responses in milliseconds—regardless of whether you're routing to OpenAI, Anthropic, or Google. What does this mean for your bill and your latency? Both drop, often significantly, especially for teams running high-volume, repetitive workloads like customer support bots or batch content generation. The cache is configurable per route, with adjustable TTLs and invalidation rules, so you stay in control of freshness versus cost. Available now for all Pro and Enterprise plans. Check your dashboard to enable it today.

输出 259 tok 延迟 4.8 s

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Why pay twice for identical AI queries simply because you routed them to different model vendors? Today, we introduce Universal Prompt Caching directly within our unified API gateway architecture. This capability stores repeated prompt contexts across OpenAI, Anthropic, and local models, instantly returning stored results to eliminate redundant computation fees. When your application sends an LLM request, the gateway inspects the payload, identifies semantic matches, and returns accurate cached responses in under ten milliseconds. Engineering teams can now slash inference latency by eighty percent while dramatically reducing monthly token expenditures across diverse production deployments. You retain complete privacy control, flexible cache eviction policies, and granular metrics through a single dashboard. Update your routing settings today to accelerate overall system performance.

输出 2858 tok (+2718 思考) 延迟 14.1 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",
    # model="gemini-3.7-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 key →

常见问题

Claude Sonnet 5 和 Gemini 3.7 Flash 哪个更便宜?

按「输入 / 1M token」算,Gemini 3.7 Flash 更便宜($0.75 对 $2,相差 2.7×)。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 和 Gemini 3.7 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 和 Gemini 3.7 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。

相关对比

我们的实测研究