🎁 新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,免绑卡。

Gemini 3.7 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Sol

vs

何时使用哪一个 — 经过整理的结论,而非基准测试表格

两款模型的上下文几乎相同(gemini-3.7-flash 为 1048576,gpt-5.6-sol 为 1050000),对话、视觉、代码、工具和推理标志也一致,所以真正的差别是价格、输入输出和输出长度。大批量工作或音频、视频输入选 gemini-3.7-flash:输入 $0.75、输出 $3.75,比 gpt-5.6-sol 的 $5 和 $30 输入便宜约 6.7 倍、输出便宜约 8 倍。需要单次回复最多 128000 输出 token,或需要关闭思考的能力,且文本加图像输入就够时选 gpt-5.6-sol。

定价

Gemini 3.7 Flash GPT-5.6 Sol Δ
输入 / 1M tokens $0.75 $5 0.15×
输出 / 1M tokens $3.75 $30 0.13×
缓存读取 / 1M tokens $0.075 $0.5 0.15×
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)

Gemini 3.7 Flash · $0.75 GPT-5.6 Sol · $5
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

Gemini 3.7 Flash GPT-5.6 Sol
工具使用
思考控制 是 —— 厂商未公布调节参数 可配置
结构化输出
提示词缓存 隐式 + 显式 隐式(自动)
缓存生存时间 未公开 5–10m, up to 1h
最小缓存前缀 4096 个 token 1024 个 token

规格

Gemini 3.7 Flash GPT-5.6 Sol
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 2026-08-13 2026-07-09
知识截止日期 2026-02
上下文窗口 1M 1.1M
最大输出 66K 128K
思考参数 reasoning.effort
允许的值
reasoning.effort
  • none
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
默认值 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: Gemini 3.7 Flash · GPT-5.6 Sol

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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning causes the model to generate a high volume of invisible "thinking tokens" behind the scenes to deliberate and solve complex logic before delivering a final response. Because our vendor bills strictly on token volume, this additional internal computation effectively doubled our billable output per query. In short, our costs increased because we are now paying for the extra compute capacity required to produce significantly higher-accuracy answers.

输出 878 tok (+799 思考) 延迟 6.9 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model generate additional internal tokens before producing an answer, so each request consumes more billable compute. Reasoning may also increase response length, latency, tool calls, and retries, further raising per-request cost. In short, usage volume may be unchanged, but the cost per task increased enough to double the bill.

输出 111 tok (+34 思考) 延迟 2.3 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

Gemini 3.7 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 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ### Explanation of the Bug The original function tracked equal adjacent transitions instead of the actual number of elements in a run, causing all non-empty run lengths to be undercounted by one (e.g., returning `0` instead of `1` for single-element lists because the loop never executes, and `1` instead of `2` for pairs). Initializing both `best` and `cur` to `1` (after handling empty inputs) and resetting `cur` to `1` on a mismatch ensures every individual element is counted as a valid run of at least length one.

输出 1050 tok (+827 思考) 延迟 6.4 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 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 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The original function counted equal *adjacencies* rather than items, so a run of length one produced `0` and every longer run was undercounted by one. Initializing `cur` and `best` to `1` for nonempty input makes them represent item counts, resetting `cur` to `1` starts a new run at the current item, and updating `best` on every iteration ensures a run reaching the final index is included.

输出 316 tok (+135 思考) 延迟 5.2 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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld"

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

输出 918 tok (+858 思考) 延迟 6.2 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

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

输出 194 tok (+147 思考) 延迟 3.2 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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Why pay twice for identical AI queries simply because you routed them to different model vendors? Today, we introduce Universal Prompt Caching directly within our unified API gateway architecture. This capability stores repeated prompt contexts across OpenAI, Anthropic, and local models, instantly returning stored results to eliminate redundant computation fees. When your application sends an LLM request, the gateway inspects the payload, identifies semantic matches, and returns accurate cached responses in under ten milliseconds. Engineering teams can now slash inference latency by eighty percent while dramatically reducing monthly token expenditures across diverse production deployments. You retain complete privacy control, flexible cache eviction policies, and granular metrics through a single dashboard. Update your routing settings today to accelerate overall system performance.

输出 2858 tok (+2718 思考) 延迟 14.1 s

GPT-5.6 Sol 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today, we’re introducing Provider Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that reuses prompt prefixes across supported AI providers, reducing latency, token costs, and duplicated processing. Teams can define cache policies once, route requests dynamically, and preserve provider flexibility without rewriting application logic. Switching models during testing or failover? The gateway identifies eligible prompt segments, applies provider-specific caching controls, and reports hits, misses, savings, and expiration details through unified logs and metrics. Configurable TTLs, tenant isolation, encryption, and cache-bypass options help teams balance performance, privacy, and freshness for every workload. Provider Prompt Cache is available today in beta through the dashboard and API, with SDK examples and migration guidance included. […]

输出 733 tok (+564 思考) 延迟 7.7 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="gemini-3.7-flash",
    # model="gpt-5.6-sol",  # 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

Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GPT-5.6 Sol 哪个更便宜?

在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面,Gemini 3.7 Flash 更便宜($0.75 对比 $5,相差 6.7×)。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 Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GPT-5.6 Sol 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。

Gemini 3.7 Flash 和 GPT-5.6 Sol 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