DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) vs GLM-5.3-Flash
何时用哪一个
两者都是文本输出的 flash 级模型，具有 1,000,000-token 的上下文窗口，但它们在价格和输入上存在分歧：glm-5.3-flash 的输入成本为 $0.15，输出为 $0.5，比 $0.44 和 $1.32 的 deepseek-v4-flash-0731 大约便宜 2.9x 和 2.6x，并且它在文本之外还接受图像和视频。对于低成本的大批量文本工作或任何多模态任务，请选择 glm-5.3-flash，但需注意其思考模式无法关闭。当你需要极长的单次响应时，请选择 deepseek-v4-flash-0731，因为其 393,216-token 的最大输出大约是 GLM 的 163,840 的 2.4x。
Benchmark 成绩
厂商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
定价
| DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) | GLM-5.3-Flash | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 输入 / 1M tokens | $0.44 | $0.15 | 2.9× |
| 输出 / 1M tokens | $1.32 | $0.5 | 2.6× |
| 缓存读取 / 1M tokens | $0.044 | $0.03 | 1.5× |
| 缓存写入 | 不单独收费 | - | - |
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 67 个 聊天 模型的 每 1M token 的输入价格（对数刻度）
能力
| DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) | GLM-5.3-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| 工具使用 | 是 | 是 |
| 思考控制 | 是 —— 厂商未公布调节参数 | 始终开启 |
| 结构化输出 | 是 | 是 |
| 提示词缓存 | 隐式（自动） | 隐式（自动） |
| 缓存生存时间 | no fixed TTL (evicted when unused) | 未公开 |
| 最小缓存前缀 | 未公开 | 未公开 |
规格
| DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) | GLM-5.3-Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| 输入模态 | 文本 | 文本 图像 视频 |
| 输出模态 | 文本 | 文本 |
| 发布日期 | 2026-07-31 | - |
| 上下文窗口 | 1M | 1M |
| 最大输出 | 393K | 164K |
| 思考参数 | - | reasoning_effort |
| 允许的值 | - | reasoning_effort
|
| 默认值 | - | max |
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： DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) · GLM-5.3-Flash
单个 Prompt，两个模型 —— 通过网关实测
DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) 通过 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning mode prompts the model to generate extensive internal chain-of-thought tokens before answering, often multiplying total token output per query by several times. This directly inflates costs because we are billed per token, and these reasoning tokens are processed at a premium compute tier that carries a higher price per million tokens. However, this spend buys measurably higher accuracy and fewer failed calls, so we are tracking it against specific error-reduction KPIs to ensure the ROI justifies the increase.
输出 365 tok (+266 思考) 延迟 5.1 s
GLM-5.3-Flash 通过 · 3 sentences
Enabling reasoning means the model now generates thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens before each visible answer, and we're billed for those hidden tokens at full output rates—our most expensive tier. Since output tokens cost 3–5x more than input tokens, that hidden thinking volume compounds across every request, which is why the bill doubled rather than edged up. If the spend concerns you, the fix is straightforward: route only complex queries to reasoning models and keep simple tasks on standard ones, which can reclaim a meaningful share of that cost without losing accuracy where it matters.
输出 742 tok (+626 思考) 延迟 23.2 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。
DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) 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 ``` The original bug stems from initializing `cur` to 0 and only incrementing it when adjacent elements are equal, which counts the number of *equal transitions* rather than the actual run length—so every run of length L is reported as L−1, and a single‑element run (with no transitions) yields 0. Moreover, because `best` is updated only inside the equality branch, it never accounts for a run that ends at the last element if that run is longer than any previously seen (though the real issue remains the off‑by‑one). […]
输出 1268 tok (+1016 思考) 延迟 14.0 s
GLM-5.3-Flash 通过 · 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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` **The bug:** `cur` is supposed to hold the length of the current run, but it's seeded with `0` and reset to `0` on a mismatch instead of `1` — and since the loop starts at index 1, the first element of every run never passes through the `==` branch and so never gets counted at all. That means `cur` actually holds *run length minus 1* for every run, so every run is underreported by one: a single-element input never enters the loop and returns 0 instead of 1, and a run of length n returns n − 1 (e.g., `[3, 3, 3]` returns 2). […]
输出 2462 tok (+2138 思考) 延迟 29.1 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。
DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null
{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": null }
输出 1119 tok (+1072 思考) 延迟 12.3 s
GLM-5.3-Flash 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending the Q4 close"
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending the Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: revenue of 412 is on a constant-currency basis as stated; growth of "eleven and change" is approximated as 11 since no precise figure is given.
输出 717 tok (+616 思考) 延迟 9.1 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。
DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) 未命中 · 141 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Introducing Prompt Cache for API Gateway** We are pleased to announce Prompt Cache, a new feature that stores and reuses identical prompt prefixes across all connected LLM providers. By automatically recognizing repeated requests, this cache reduces token consumption and lowers latency without altering your application logic. Whether you use OpenAI, Anthropic, or open-source models, the cache operates transparently, ensuring consistent behavior while cutting costs. Developers can configure cache TTL and scoping rules via a simple API call, giving you precise control over data freshness and privacy. This feature also minimizes redundant upstream calls, freeing provider rate limits for more critical workloads. Start caching today through the dashboard or CLI, and watch your operational expenses drop significantly. […]
输出 254 tok (+80 思考) 延迟 4.4 s
GLM-5.3-Flash 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question
Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, the newest feature in our API gateway. Today, teams send identical prompts to multiple LLM providers and pay full price each time. Why duplicate that work and cost? With Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, your gateway stores prompt-response pairs and serves repeated requests from cache, regardless of which provider handles the call. The result: lower latency, reduced spend, and consistent outputs across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Configure cache policies per route, set TTLs, and invalidate entries instantly through the dashboard or API. Built-in analytics show hit rates and savings in real time. Enable the cache with a single flag, no code changes required. Available today on all paid plans. Contact sales for enterprise volume pricing details.
输出 2095 tok (+1937 思考) 延迟 20.2 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="deepseek-v4-flash-0731",
# model="glm-5.3-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: "deepseek-v4-flash-0731",
// model: "glm-5.3-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": "deepseek-v4-flash-0731",
# "model": "glm-5.3-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: "deepseek-v4-flash-0731",
// Model: "glm-5.3-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("deepseek-v4-flash-0731")
// .model("glm-5.3-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
DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) 和 GLM-5.3-Flash 哪个更便宜？
在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面，GLM-5.3-Flash 更便宜（$0.15 对比 $0.44，相差 2.9×）。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 DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) 和 GLM-5.3-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。
DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) 和 GLM-5.3-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。