🎁 新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,免绑卡。

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) vs GLM-5.2

vs

何时使用哪一个 — 经过整理的结论,而非基准测试表格

两者都具有 1,000,000 token 的上下文,并具备支持对话、代码、推理和工具的文本输入输出特性,因此区别实际上在于输出长度和价格:deepseek-v4-pro-0813 的输入成本大约高出 1.7 倍($1.32 对比 $0.77),输出成本大约高出 1.6 倍($3.96 对比 $2.42),但允许 393216 个输出 token 而前者为 131072。当单个回复必须非常长,或者大量缓存重用使其 $0.132 的缓存读取价格比 $0.143 更有优势时,请选择 deepseek-v4-pro-0813。在处理更便宜的大规模工作时,或者想要在每个请求中禁用 thinking 时,请选择 glm-5.2。

定价

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) GLM-5.2 Δ
输入 / 1M tokens $1.32 $0.77 1.7×
输出 / 1M tokens $3.96 $2.42 1.6×
缓存读取 / 1M tokens $0.132 $0.143 0.92×
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 63 个 聊天 模型的 每 1M token 的输入价格(对数刻度)

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) · $1.32 GLM-5.2 · $0.77
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) GLM-5.2
工具使用
思考控制 始终开启 可配置
结构化输出
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 Pro (0813) GLM-5.2
输入模态 文本 文本
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-08-13 2026-06-16
上下文窗口 1M 1M
最大输出 393K 131K
思考参数 reasoning_effort
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
允许的值
reasoning_effort
  • the model card documents low
  • high
  • max
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled
reasoning_effort
  • none
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max (none and minimal skip thinking, low and medium map to high, xhigh maps to max)
默认值 enabled, with reasoning_effort at max: the only GLM with an effort dial, and it defaults to the top of it

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 Pro (0813) · GLM-5.2

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

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate a hidden chain-of-thought with many additional tokens before producing the final answer, which sharply increases compute consumption per request. Those extra reasoning tokens are billed at the same or higher rates, so total usage doubled even though the volume of final outputs stayed similar. We can control this by adjusting reasoning effort, setting token limits, or routing only complex requests through reasoning mode.

输出 308 tok (+226 思考) 延迟 5.1 s

GLM-5.2 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning means the LLM now generates thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens to systematically work through complex problems before producing a final answer. Because our cloud providers bill for these internal processing steps at the same rate as standard output, our billable token volume per query has doubled. While this increases our direct API costs, it drastically reduces error rates and manual review labor, ultimately lowering our total cost per resolved transaction.

输出 1223 tok (+1138 思考) 延迟 17.1 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

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) 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 `cur` was initialized to `0` and only counted adjacent matching pairs, so a run of length `n` produced `n - 1` (or `0` for a single element) instead of `n`. The code also reset to `0` on a change, when the new run should start at length `1`. Initializing `cur` and `best` to `1` fixes both the single-element case and runs ending at the last index.

输出 1315 tok (+1130 思考) 延迟 16.9 s

GLM-5.2 未命中 · 1/8 cases (fails [1])

```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 […]

输出 4097 tok (+4036 思考) 延迟 58.4 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

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{"company":"Meridian Robotics","quarter":"September quarter","revenue_usd_m":412,"growth_pct":11.0,"guidance":null}

输出 2155 tok (+2121 思考) 延迟 26.0 s

GLM-5.2 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "withheld" } ```

输出 1947 tok (+1893 思考) 延迟 30.9 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

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) 通过 · 121 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing cross-provider prompt caching in our API gateway. Send a prompt once, and the gateway stores its computed prefix across Anthropic, OpenAI, and other LLM providers. Subsequent requests with the same prompt hit the cache, cutting latency and token costs while keeping outputs consistent across routing decisions and provider failovers. Teams can route identical prompts between providers without reprocessing shared context or lengthy system instructions. How much could you save on repeated prompt prefixes? The cache respects provider-specific key formats, handles TTLs automatically, and works with streaming and batch requests. Enable it with one configuration flag—no changes to your application code. Available today on all plans. Monitor cache hit rates, token savings, and provider-specific performance metrics in the live dashboard.

输出 2845 tok (+2694 思考) 延迟 25.5 s

GLM-5.2 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

We are introducing Caching for our API Gateway, the smartest way to optimize your workflows. Why pay for the exact same response twice? Now, you can automatically store and reuse prompt results across multiple AI providers, drastically reducing latency and overall operational costs. If a user submits a duplicate query, the gateway serves the cached answer instantly, regardless of whether you route to OpenAI, Anthropic, or others. This directly translates to faster applications and significantly lower monthly API bills. You can easily configure your specific caching rules within the developer dashboard and watch your efficiency soar. Stop wasting your valuable tokens on completely redundant computations. Upgrade to the latest gateway version today and experience the future of intelligent prompt management.

输出 11125 tok (+10984 思考) 延迟 114.8 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="deepseek-v4-pro-0813",
    # model="glm-5.2",  # 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

DeepSeek V4 Pro (0813) 和 GLM-5.2 哪个更便宜?

在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面,GLM-5.2 更便宜($0.77 对比 $1.32,相差 1.7×)。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 Pro (0813) 和 GLM-5.2 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 Pro (0813) 和 GLM-5.2 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