新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,免绑卡。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite vs Gemini 3.8 Flash

vs

何时用哪一个

两者都接受文本、图像、音频和视频并返回文本,因此真正的差异在于价格与上下文:Dola-Seed-2.0-lite 的计费为输入 $0.25 和输出 $2,而 gemini-3.8-flash 为 $0.75 和 $3.75,输入和输出大约分别便宜 3x 和 1.9x,并且它允许更长的 131072 token 回复。当你需要 1048576 token 窗口(是 Dola-Seed-2.0-lite 256000 的 4x)或其声明的 reasoning 和 vision 标志时,请选择 gemini-3.8-flash;对于大批量多模态批处理请求,请选择 Dola-Seed-2.0-lite,在这种情况下它的思考功能也可以被关闭。

Benchmark 成绩

高于同侪均值无人分数更高Dola Seed 2.0 Lite4 / 103 / 10Gemini 3.8 Flash12 / 175 / 17
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Gemini 3.8 Flash 其他被测模型 同侪均值 无人分数更高
DeepSWE 1.1
N/A
73.7%
WenetSpeech test-net (CER)
无人分数更高 4.47%
N/A
BioMysteryBench hard
N/A
无人分数更高 56.5%
OSWorld-Verified
64.4%
N/A
HealthBench Professional
N/A
52.1%
Finance Agent v2
N/A
无人分数更高 61.4%
Legal Agent Benchmark
N/A
10%
GPQA Diamond
88.4%
95.3%
BrowseComp
64%
N/A
CharXiv (RQ) no tools
N/A
无人分数更高 86.2%

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

定价

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Gemini 3.8 Flash Δ
输入 / 1M tokens $0.25 $0.75 0.33×
输出 / 1M tokens $2 $3.75 0.53×
缓存读取 / 1M tokens $0.05 $0.075 0.67×

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 71 个 聊天 模型的 每 1M token 的输入价格(对数刻度)

能力

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Gemini 3.8 Flash
工具使用
思考控制 可配置 是 —— 厂商未公布调节参数
结构化输出
提示词缓存 隐式 + 显式 隐式 + 显式
缓存生存时间 未公开 未公开
最小缓存前缀 1024 个 token 4096 个 token

规格

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite Gemini 3.8 Flash
输入模态 文本 图像 音频 视频 文本 图像 音频 视频
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-02-14 2026-09-02
知识截止日期 - 2026-03
上下文窗口 256K 1M
最大输出 131K 66K
思考参数
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
-
允许的值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled (no auto)
reasoning_effort
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
-
默认值 enabled, with reasoning_effort medium -

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: Dola Seed 2.0 Lite · Gemini 3.8 Flash

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

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

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通过 · 3 sentences

When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating hidden "thinking tokens" to work through logic step-by-step before producing a final answer. Because AI vendors bill for every single token processed—visible or not—this internal deliberation dramatically inflated our billable volume per query. In short, while our total number of user requests remained flat, the cost per transaction doubled to buy higher accuracy on complex tasks.

输出 705 tok (+624 思考) 延迟 6.4 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。

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

Gemini 3.8 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 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function counted equal-neighbor transitions rather than the actual items making up each run. Because `cur` started at `0` (and was reset to `0` on mismatches), every run was undercounted by one: single-element lists returned `0` because the loop never executed, and any subsequent run—including those ending at the last index—recorded a count of $N - 1$ instead of $N$. The fix handles empty input upfront, initializes both `cur` and `best` to `1` (since any single element forms a run of length 1), and resets `cur` to `1` whenever a new run begins.

输出 1393 tok (+1149 思考) 延迟 10.1 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。

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

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

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

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

输出 3989 tok (+3932 思考) 延迟 30.4 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

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 未命中 · 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

Gemini 3.8 Flash 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Why pay multiple model providers for the exact same output? Introducing Universal Prompt Cache, our latest API gateway capability engineered to cut compute expenses and drop inference latency. When your application makes a call, the gateway inspects a central memory layer before routing traffic to external LLMs. If an identical query was previously processed by OpenAI, Anthropic, or Mistral, our gateway returns that response immediately. This shared cache eliminates duplicate token fees and insulates your production apps from vendor rate limits or unexpected downtime. Developers can easily customize expiration settings, enforce strict data privacy controls, and configure invalidation logic across every endpoint. Stop wasting your budget on repeated queries. Enable prompt caching in your dashboard to accelerate your pipeline today.

输出 3833 tok (+3688 思考) 延迟 21.8 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="Dola-Seed-2.0-lite",
    # model="gemini-3.8-flash",  # 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 密钥 →

常见问题

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 Gemini 3.8 Flash 哪个更便宜?

在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面,Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 更便宜($0.25 对比 $0.75,相差 3.0×)。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 Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 Gemini 3.8 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。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 Gemini 3.8 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。

相关对比

来自我们的实测研究