新人 免费注册,送 10 次调用,最高 $1,无需绑卡。

GLM-5.3-Flash vs GPT-5.6

vs

什么时候选哪个

glm-5.3-flash 每百万 token 输入 $0.15、输出 $0.5,而 gpt-5.6 为 $4 和 $20,输入便宜得多,输出便宜 40 倍,除文本和图像外还支持视频输入,最大输出为 163840 token(gpt-5.6 为 128000),适合高吞吐、长上下文或含视频的场景。gpt-5.6 的上下文窗口略大,为 1050000,知识截止日期为 2026-02,并且可以关闭 thinking,glm-5.3-flash 不支持这一点。需要关闭 thinking 时选 gpt-5.6,看重吞吐量或视频输入时选 glm-5.3-flash。

Benchmark 成绩

领先高于同类均值无更高分GLM-5.3-Flash13 / 50 / 5GPT-5.6494 / 12128 / 121

5 项两边都有成绩。

GLM-5.3-Flash GPT-5.6 其他参测模型 同类均值 ★ 没有模型得分更高
DeepSWE 1.1
63.4%
72.7%
BioMysteryBench hard
N/A
44.7%
OSWorld-Verified
N/A
83%
Cybergym
N/A
84.5%
HealthBench Professional
N/A
60.5%
Finance Agent v2
N/A
53.8%
Harvey Lab-AA
N/A
87.2%
Humanity's Last Exam with tools
55.3%
58%
Agents' Last Exam
26.3%
53.6%
LVBench
N/A
82.1%

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

价格

GLM-5.3-Flash GPT-5.6 Δ
输入 / 1M token $0.15 $4 0.037×
输出 / 1M token $0.5 $20 0.025×
缓存读取 / 1M token $0.03 $0.4 0.075×
缓存写入 - 不单独收费 -

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)

GLM-5.3-Flash · $0.15 GPT-5.6 · $4
$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

能力

GLM-5.3-Flash GPT-5.6
工具调用 是 是
思考控制 始终开启 可配置
结构化输出 是 是
提示词缓存 隐式(自动) 隐式(自动)
缓存有效期 未公布 5-10m, up to 1h
最小缓存前缀 未公布 1024 个 token

规格

GLM-5.3-Flash GPT-5.6
输入模态 文本 图像 视频 文本 图像
输出模态 文本 文本
发布日期 2026-08-26 2026-07-09
知识截止日期 - 2026-02
上下文窗口 1M 1.1M
最大输出 164K 128K
思考参数 reasoning_effort reasoning.effort
可选值
reasoning_effort
  • low
  • high
  • max
reasoning.effort
  • none
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
默认值 max medium

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: GLM-5.3-Flash · GPT-5.6

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

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

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,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

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

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(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

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

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

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

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

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

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="glm-5.3-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 key →

常见问题

GLM-5.3-Flash 和 GPT-5.6 哪个更便宜?

按「输入 / 1M token」算,GLM-5.3-Flash 更便宜($0.15 对 $4,相差 27×)。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 GLM-5.3-Flash 和 GPT-5.6 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。

GLM-5.3-Flash 和 GPT-5.6 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