新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,无需绑卡。

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite vs GLM-5.3-Flash

vs

什么时候选哪个

当你的输入包含音频时,请选择 Dola-Seed-2.0-lite,因为它是两者中唯一能在文本、图像和视频之外接受音频的模型,并且适用于你需要关闭思考选项的场景。对于长文档和高工作量任务,请选择 glm-5.3-flash:它提供 1000000-token 的上下文(相对于 256000),并且在输入 $0.15 和输出 $0.5 的情况下,其每 token 成本低于 Dola-Seed-2.0-lite 的 $0.25 和 $2,输出端便宜四倍。两者的输出上限均超过 131072 token,且都支持对话、代码和工具,因此真正的区分点在于音频和可选的思考,对比上下文和价格。

Benchmark 成绩

高于同类均值无更高分Dola Seed 2.0 Lite4 / 103 / 10GLM-5.3-Flash4 / 61 / 6
Dola Seed 2.0 Lite GLM-5.3-Flash 其他参测模型 同类均值 ★ 没有模型得分更高
DeepSWE 1.1
N/A
63.4%
WenetSpeech test-net (CER)
没有模型得分更高 4.47%
N/A
OSWorld-Verified
64.4%
N/A
GDPval-AA v2 Elo · 1504-1773 据 Z.ai 公布 · 2026-09-04
N/A
没有模型得分更高 1773
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 GLM-5.3-Flash Δ
输入 / 1M token $0.25 $0.15 1.7×
输出 / 1M token $2 $0.5 4×
缓存读取 / 1M token $0.05 $0.03 1.7×

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 79 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)

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite · $0.25 GLM-5.3-Flash · $0.15
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite GLM-5.3-Flash
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 隐式(自动)
缓存有效期 未公布 未公布
最小缓存前缀 1024 个 token 未公布

规格

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite GLM-5.3-Flash
输入模态 文本 图像 音频 视频 文本 图像 视频
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-02-14 2026-08-26
上下文窗口 256K 1M
最大输出 131K 164K
思考参数
  • thinking.type
  • reasoning_effort
reasoning_effort
可选值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled (no auto)
reasoning_effort
  • minimal
  • low
  • medium
  • high
reasoning_effort
  • low
  • high
  • max
默认值 enabled, with reasoning_effort medium max

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 · GLM-5.3-Flash

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

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,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

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(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

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

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

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

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="glm-5.3-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 key →

常见问题

Dola Seed 2.0 Lite 和 GLM-5.3-Flash 哪个更便宜?

按「输入 / 1M token」算,GLM-5.3-Flash 更便宜($0.15 对 $0.25,相差 1.7×)。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 GLM-5.3-Flash 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 GLM-5.3-Flash 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