🎁 新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,免绑卡。

GLM-5.1 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

glm-5.1 是更便宜的纯文本选项,每百万输入 $1.4、输出 $4.4,上下文 200000 token、最大输出 131072 token,因此适合每个 token 都要计较的大批量对话、代码和工具调用工作。gpt-5.6 输入贵约 3.6 倍、输出贵约 6.8 倍(每百万 $5 和 $30),但它在文本之外接受图像,并带 1050000 token 上下文,是前者的五倍多。需要视觉或超长输入时选 gpt-5.6;否则 glm-5.1 以更低价格覆盖同样的推理和工具标志。

定价

GLM-5.1 GPT-5.6 Δ
输入 / 1M tokens $1.4 $5 0.28×
输出 / 1M tokens $4.4 $30 0.15×
缓存读取 / 1M tokens $0.26 $0.5 0.52×
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)

GLM-5.1 · $1.4 GPT-5.6 · $5
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

GLM-5.1 GPT-5.6
工具使用
思考控制 可配置 可配置
结构化输出
提示词缓存 隐式(自动) 隐式(自动)
缓存生存时间 未公开 5–10m, up to 1h
最小缓存前缀 未公开 1024 个 token

规格

GLM-5.1 GPT-5.6
输入模态 文本 文本 图像
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-04-07 2026-07-09
知识截止日期 2026-02
上下文窗口 200K 1.1M
最大输出 131K 128K
思考参数 thinking.type reasoning.effort
允许的值
thinking.type
  • enabled
  • disabled
reasoning.effort
  • none
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
默认值 enabled, and the model automatically determines whether to think 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: GLM-5.1 · 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

GLM-5.1 通过 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning requires the LLM to generate thousands of invisible "thinking" tokens to work through complex logic before producing the final answer. Because we are billed on total token volume, these intermediate steps are charged at the premium output rate, drastically increasing the variable cost per query. The invoice doubled simply because the model is now doing roughly twice the computational work per request, trading higher variable compute costs for significantly improved analytical accuracy.

输出 913 tok (+827 思考) 延迟 10.9 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

GLM-5.1 通过 · 8/8 cases

```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 ``` The original function tracks the number of adjacent equal pairs rather than the actual run length. By initializing `cur` and `best` to 0 and incrementing `cur` only when a match occurs, a run of length L produces a count of L−1. This causes single‑element inputs to return 0 (since the loop never runs) and generally returns a value one less than the true run length, effectively omitting the final element of any run—including those that end at the last index. […]

输出 2642 tok (+2414 思考) 延迟 26.1 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

GLM-5.1 通过 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

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

输出 1465 tok (+1410 思考) 延迟 16.1 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

GLM-5.1 通过 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

We are thrilled to introduce prompt caching across providers in the API gateway. Why pay twice for the same prompt context? Now, when your application sends identical prompt prefixes to different LLM providers, our gateway automatically caches the input, reducing latency and cutting costs. This feature intelligently recognizes repeated prompt structures across OpenAI, Anthropic, and others, storing them efficiently at the network edge. Developers no longer need to manage separate caching logic for each individual provider. Instead, our unified system handles it directly, ensuring faster response times on all subsequent requests. Stop wasting valuable tokens on redundant processing workloads. Upgrade your integration today and experience immediate performance gains while keeping your infrastructure simple and your overall monthly billing incredibly low.

输出 7589 tok (+7447 思考) 延迟 188.9 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="glm-5.1",
    # 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

GLM-5.1 和 GPT-5.6 哪个更便宜?

在 输入 / 1m tokens 方面,GLM-5.1 更便宜($1.4 对比 $5,相差 3.6×)。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 GLM-5.1 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。

GLM-5.1 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