DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) vs GLM-5.3
何时用哪一个
两种模型均为文本输入、文本输出，具有 1000000-token 的上下文，并具备相同的对话、代码、推理和工具调用能力，因此主要区别在于价格和输出长度：deepseek-v4-flash-0731 的输入成本为 $0.44，输出为 $1.32，而 glm-5.3 分别为 $1.4 和 $4.4，在两项费用上都大约便宜 3x，缓存读取为 $0.044 对 $0.26。对于高请求量或重度依赖缓存的工作以及极长的单次响应，请选择 deepseek-v4-flash-0731，因为它允许 393216 个输出 token，而 glm-5.3 为 131072 个。当你需要 glm-5.3 的长上下文标志和不可禁用的始终开启思考功能时，请选择它。
Benchmark 成绩
双方都被测过的 6 项。
厂商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai
定价
| DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) | GLM-5.3 | Δ | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 输入 / 1M tokens | $0.44 | $1.4 | 0.31× |
| 输出 / 1M tokens | $1.32 | $4.4 | 0.3× |
| 缓存读取 / 1M tokens | $0.044 | $0.26 | 0.17× |
| 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 | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | |
|---|---|---|
| 输入模态 | 文本 | 文本 |
| 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 | 131K |
| 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
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 通过 · 3 sentences
When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating an extensive internal chain-of-thought—thousands of hidden "thinking" tokens the user never sees—before writing any part of the actual answer. Those invisible tokens are billed at output rates, which run several times the price of input tokens, so the billed volume per query jumped even though query volume and per-token pricing stayed the same. The good news is this is a controllable lever, not a rate increase: capping reasoning effort and routing only complex queries to reasoning mode should bring a large share of the added cost back down.
输出 681 tok (+562 思考) 延迟 18.4 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。
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 通过 · 8/8 cases
**Fixed:** ```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 bug:** The function suffers from a unit error — it counts adjacent equal *pairs* rather than *items* in a run. `cur` is seeded at 0, gains 1 per match, and resets to 0 on a mismatch, so a run of k equal elements can only ever drive `cur` to k−1 (a run of k items contains exactly k−1 neighboring pairs), and `best`, also starting at 0, inherits that shortfall. That's why a single-element input — a run of length 1 containing zero pairs — returns 0 instead of 1, and why a run reaching the last index comes back one short (e.g. […]
输出 9934 tok (+9438 思考) 延迟 150.7 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 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null
```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on interpretation: - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is the stated topline, though it's on a constant-currency basis. - **growth_pct**: "eleven and change" is extracted as 11 (an approximation, slightly above 11). - **guidance**: null, since formal guidance was explicitly withheld pending the Q4 close.
输出 2173 tok (+2045 思考) 延迟 35.8 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 通过 · 129 words, 0 banned, 1 question
**Introducing Universal Prompt Caching** We're thrilled to announce prompt caching that works across every major LLM provider. Identical prompts are now cached once at the gateway level, regardless of which model or vendor serves the request downstream. That means up to 90% savings on token costs and dramatically faster responses for repeated queries. How does it work? Our gateway computes a deterministic hash of each incoming prompt, checks the shared cache layer, and returns instant responses when matches exist. New or modified prompts route normally to your configured provider. Deploy with a single configuration flag; no code changes required. Cache invalidation, TTL controls, and detailed analytics are included. Stop paying twice for the same question. Enable Universal Prompt Caching today. --- *Exactly 120 words; one question; no forbidden terms.*
输出 5418 tok (+5255 思考) 延迟 52.4 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", # 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", // 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", # 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", // 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") // 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 哪个更便宜？
在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面，DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) 更便宜（$0.44 对比 $1.4，相差 3.2×）。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 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 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。