🎁 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

vs

何时使用哪一个 — 经过整理的结论,而非基准测试表格

这两款模型均为支持工具、视觉和代码的文本输出推理模型,且上下文几乎相同(gemini-3.7-flash 为 1048576,gpt-5.6 为 1050000),因此真正的区别在于价格和输入:gemini-3.7-flash 的输入为 $0.75,输出为 $3.75,而 gpt-5.6 的输入和输出分别为 $5 和 $30,前者在输入上大约便宜 6.7x,输出便宜 8x,并且它还支持音频和视频。当你需要其 128000 的最大输出 tokens 或关闭 thinking 的选项时请选择 gpt-5.6;而在处理大批量文本、图像、音频或视频任务且寻求低得多的费率时,请选择 gemini-3.7-flash。

定价

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

能力

Gemini 3.7 Flash GPT-5.6
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
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

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 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning makes the model generate many additional internal tokens before producing an answer, so each request consumes substantially more compute. Those reasoning tokens are billed even though they are not visible to users, and longer processing can also increase tool calls, retries, and output length. The bill doubled because our cost per request rose, not necessarily because usage volume increased; we can control it by limiting reasoning effort and routing simpler tasks to cheaper models.

输出 126 tok (+30 思考) 延迟 3.0 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 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: best = max(best, cur) cur = 1 return max(best, cur) ``` The original code counted equal *transitions* rather than items, so a run of one had length `0`, a run of three had length `2`, and tracking from zero caused the off-by-one error. The corrected version starts each run at length `1`, resets to `1` when the value changes, and performs a final `max` after the loop so a run ending at the last element is included; an empty input still returns `0`.

输出 277 tok (+93 思考) 延迟 4.2 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 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance "withheld pending the Q4 close"

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

输出 179 tok (+118 思考) 延迟 3.7 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 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Today we are introducing Prompt Cache, a new API gateway feature that stores reusable prompt prefixes and serves them across supported model providers. By recognizing identical system instructions, tools, examples, and context blocks, Prompt Cache reduces repeated input processing, lowers latency, and helps control token costs without changing application code. Teams can configure retention windows, cache keys, provider routing, encryption, and regional storage policies from one dashboard or API. What happens when a preferred provider is unavailable? The gateway can route requests to another provider while reusing eligible cached content, preserving performance and consistency. Built-in metrics report hit rates, savings, latency, and provider usage, while audit logs support governance. Prompt Cache is available today in public preview for all customers.

输出 628 tok (+473 思考) 延迟 7.3 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",  # 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 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 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 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