新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,无需绑卡。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite vs Claude Sonnet 5.5

vs

什么时候选哪个

Dola-Seed-2.0-lite 是价格更低、输入支持更广的选项:其输入为 $0.25 且输出为 $2,相比之下 claude-sonnet-5-5 分别为 $2 和 $10,即输入低 8x 且输出低 5x,此外还支持音频和视频输入,而 Sonnet 仅接收文本和图像。claude-sonnet-5-5 带来 1000000-token 的上下文(对比 256000),以及无法完全关闭的自适应思考功能。对于大吞吐量且思考功能可选的多模态工作,请选择 Dola-Seed-2.0-lite;当需要非常长的输入时,请选择 claude-sonnet-5-5。

Benchmark 成绩

Claude Sonnet 5.5:供应商没有公布 benchmark 成绩。

高于同类均值无更高分Dola Seed 2.0 Lite4 / 103 / 10
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Claude Sonnet 5.5 其他参测模型 同类均值 ★ 没有模型得分更高
SWE Multilingual GPT-5.4 High
66.6%
N/A
WenetSpeech test-net (CER)
没有模型得分更高 4.47%
N/A
OSWorld-Verified
64.4%
N/A
GPQA Diamond
88.4%
N/A
BrowseComp
64%
N/A
MMVU
76.7%
N/A

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

价格

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Claude Sonnet 5.5 Δ
输入 / 1M token $0.25 $2 0.13×
输出 / 1M token $2 $10 0.2×
缓存读取 / 1M token $0.05 $0.1 0.5×
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 78 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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Claude Sonnet 5.5
工具调用 是 是
思考控制 可配置 始终开启
结构化输出 是 是
提示词缓存 隐式 + 显式 显式(由你标记前缀)
缓存有效期 未公布 5m default, 1h option
最小缓存前缀 1024 个 token 1024 个 token

规格

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Claude Sonnet 5.5
输入模态 文本 图像 音频 视频 文本 图像
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-02-14 2026-09-28
知识截止日期 - 2026-06
上下文窗口 256K 1M
最大输出 131K 128K
思考参数
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
thinking.type
可选值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled (no auto)
reasoning_effort
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
thinking.type
  • adaptive (default)
  • between_tools
默认值 enabled, with reasoning_effort medium 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: Dola Seed 2.0 Lite · Claude Sonnet 5.5

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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning on our production LLM requires the model to run resource-intensive multi-step chain-of-thought inference for every customer-facing query, rather than the single-pass inference that powered our original non-reasoning deployment, and GPU compute—which makes up 90% of our total LLM bill—scales directly with the number of compute cycles each query consumes. Our cloud provider’s LLM billing model charges per million processed tokens, and reasoning workflows generate an average of 2.1x more hidden processing tokens (the intermediate problem-solving steps the model never surfaces to end users) that are still billable, pushing our total monthly token consumption just over double what it was prior to enabling the feature. […]

输出 1306 tok (+1096 思考) 延迟 18.2 s

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

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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 通过 · 8/8 cases

### Corrected Function ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: # Handle empty input edge case return 0 best = cur = 1 # Base run length of 1 for any non-empty single element for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 # Reset run length for the new, different element return best ``` ### Bug Explanation (single paragraph) The original function’s core flaw was that it counted the number of consecutive equal adjacent element pairs, rather than the number of elements in the run itself, leading to all results being off by one, which caused both reported issues: a run of k equal elements only has k-1 consecutive matching pairs, so the original function’s maximum `best` value was always one less than the true element count of the longest run. […]

输出 2620 tok (+2217 思考) 延迟 33.2 s

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

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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "Formal guidance withheld pending Q4 clos"

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September quarter", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Formal guidance withheld pending Q4 close" }

输出 1502 tok (+1439 思考) 延迟 20.2 s

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

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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 未通过 · 141 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we launch Cross-Provider Prompt Cache, a new feature for our Core API Gateway built to cut redundant AI costs and latency for teams routing requests across multiple LLM providers. Many development teams rotate between OpenAI, Anthropic, and Google Gemini to balance performance, cost, and capability, but identical prompts get reprocessed from scratch with every provider switch, wasting tokens and slowing response times. This feature stores validated prompt responses at the gateway layer, so repeat requests pull from cache regardless of which provider they route to, with configurable TTLs and built-in compliance with all major provider data policies. […]

输出 1870 tok (+1695 思考) 延迟 23.1 s

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

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="Dola-Seed-2.0-lite",
    # model="claude-sonnet-5-5",  # 取消注释此行,注释上一行
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

获取 API key →

常见问题

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 Claude Sonnet 5.5 哪个更便宜?

按「输入 / 1M token」算,Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 更便宜($0.25 对 $2,相差 8.0×)。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 Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 Claude Sonnet 5.5 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。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 Claude Sonnet 5.5 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