DEV Community: 橙子

I compared 4 Chinese AI models against GPT-4o and Claude — the price gap is absurd (2026)

橙子 — Tue, 28 Apr 2026 16:11:31 +0000

While GPT-5.5 and Claude Opus 4.7 dominate the headlines, Chinese AI labs have been shipping cutting-edge models at a fraction of the price. DeepSeek is now on V4, Kimi on K2.6, Qwen on 3.6, GLM on 5.1 — and the pricing gap remains enormous.

Here's what builders need to know.

The contenders

Model	Company	Context	Open Source
DeepSeek V4	DeepSeek	1M	Yes
Kimi K2.6	Moonshot AI	1M+	No
Qwen 3.6	Alibaba	128K	Partial
GLM-5.1	Zhipu AI	128K	Yes

DeepSeek V4 — The price-performance leader

DeepSeek V4 comes in two tiers: Flash and Pro. Flash is the workhorse, Pro is the heavy lifter. Both support 1M token context, thinking and non-thinking modes, tool calling, and JSON structured output.

V4 Flash:

$0.14/M input, $0.28/M output. GPT-5.5 is ~$5/$25. That's 97% cheaper.
Cache hit pricing just dropped to $0.0028/M input — 1/10th of the already-low price.
Supports both standard chat and reasoning (thinking) mode.
384K max output tokens.

V4 Pro:

$1.74/M input, $3.48/M output at full price, but currently 75% off: $0.435/$0.87 until May 31, 2026.
Higher quality on complex reasoning, math, and coding vs Flash.
At the discounted price, it's still 83% cheaper than GPT-5.5.

What's good:

1M context window. Up from 128K in V3. Now competitive with Kimi on long-document tasks.
Dual mode. One API, toggle thinking on/off. No more separate "R1" endpoint.
Anthropic API format. DeepSeek now supports the Anthropic Messages API format natively at /anthropic — drop-in replacement for Claude.
Open source. Weights available under MIT license.

What's missing:

Vision/multimodal still limited vs GPT-5.5
Function calling less polished than OpenAI
API reliability can dip during peak hours

Price (V4 Flash): $0.14/M input, $0.28/M output. GPT-5.5: ~$5/$25. 97% cheaper.

Kimi K2.6 — Multimodal with the longest context

Moonshot AI's Kimi K2.6 is the latest in their long-context lineage, now adding vision input to the 1M+ token window.

What's good:

1M+ token context with vision. Feed it massive documents with embedded images, charts, and diagrams.
K2 model also available — MoE architecture focused on code and agent capabilities.
Strong bilingual performance (Chinese + English).
File extraction API for document parsing (currently free).

What's missing:

Creative writing still lags behind Claude
No open source release
English documentation is improving but still mostly Chinese

Qwen 3.6 — Alibaba's full-stack AI

Qwen 3.6 is Alibaba's latest flagship, backed by the massive Qwen open source ecosystem ranging from 0.5B to 72B+ parameters.

What's good:

Full model family. Edge to cloud, with specialized coding, vision, and audio variants.
Strong multilingual. Top-tier scores across 20+ languages.
Qwen-Coder variant for code generation tasks.
Vision and audio models in the same ecosystem.

What's missing:

128K context trails DeepSeek V4 and Kimi K2.6
More expensive than DeepSeek V4 Flash
Alibaba Cloud account required (more friction than DeepSeek's simple signup)

GLM-5.1 — The enterprise agent specialist

Zhipu AI's GLM-5.1 is purpose-built for structured reasoning, tool use, and enterprise agent workflows.

What's good:

Best-in-class structured output. JSON mode, function calling, tool orchestration.
Open source with commercial-friendly license.
Agent-native design. Built for multi-step autonomous workflows.
All-in-one platform. Model API, fine-tuning, knowledge base, and agent framework in one place.

What's missing:

Near-zero brand recognition outside China
Raw coding/math benchmarks trail DeepSeek
English documentation still sparse

Cost comparison (per 1M tokens)

	Input	Output	vs GPT-5.5
GPT-5.5	~$5.00	~$25.00	—
Claude Opus 4.7	$5.00	$25.00	Same tier
Claude Sonnet 4.6	$3.00	$15.00	40% less
Claude Haiku 4.5	$1.00	$5.00	80% less
DeepSeek V4 Flash	$0.14	$0.28	97% less
DeepSeek V4 Pro (75% off)	$0.44	$0.87	91% less
Kimi K2.6	~$0.70	~$1.40	86% less
Qwen 3.6	~$0.55	~$2.20	89% less
GLM-5.1	~$0.55	~$0.55	92% less

For a startup processing 100M tokens/month, switching from Claude Opus 4.7 to DeepSeek V4 Flash saves ~$2,400/month. For 1B tokens, that's $24,000/month — real engineering headcount money.

When to use which

Use DeepSeek V4 Flash if: You want the best price-performance ratio in AI right now. 1M context, thinking mode, 97% cheaper than GPT-5.5. The default choice for most builders.

Use DeepSeek V4 Pro if: You need higher quality on complex tasks and the 75% discount makes it a steal.

Use Kimi K2.6 if: You process documents with mixed text and images. The vision + 1M context combo is unique.

Use Qwen 3.6 if: You need a model family to fine-tune and deploy on your own infrastructure. The open source ecosystem is unmatched.

Use GLM-5.1 if: You're building autonomous agent workflows that need reliable tool calling and structured output.

Stick with GPT-5.5/Claude Opus 4.7 if: You need the absolute best agentic coding, enterprise compliance, or the plugin ecosystem.

Chinese AI models in 2026 are not "good enough for the price" — they're genuinely competitive on quality while being 10-50x cheaper. If you're building AI features, you should at minimum run your eval suite on DeepSeek V4. The cost difference is too large to ignore.

More Chinese AI tool comparisons at ToolBridge — no hype, just data.

I tested 3 Chinese Figma alternatives — one is actually better (2026)

橙子 — Tue, 28 Apr 2026 15:46:26 +0000

Figma just raised prices again. The $12/month "Professional" plan is now $15, the $45 "Organization" plan is $55, and if you're on a team of 5 designers, you're looking at $275/month before Dev Mode seats.

I got tired of the pricing treadmill and went looking for alternatives. Not the usual suspects — Penpot, Sketch, Lunacy — those are already well-covered. I went deeper.

I spent two weeks testing three Chinese design tools that barely have English documentation. Here's what I found.

The contenders

Tool	Description	Free tier
JsDesign (即时设计)	Full Figma alternative, web-based	Unlimited files
Mockplus (墨刀)	Prototyping-focused, simpler	3 projects
Lanhu (蓝湖)	Design handoff + collaboration	10 projects

JsDesign — The Figma clone that's 90% of the way there

JsDesign is the most ambitious of the three. It's a web-based collaborative design tool that looks and feels remarkably like Figma. Same left toolbar, same right panel, same layers panel.

What's good:

Real-time collaboration works. Multiple designers in one file, seeing each other's cursors, no lag. I tested with 3 people simultaneously — it held up.
Figma file import. Drag a .fig file directly in and it converts most layouts correctly. Auto-layout, components, and text styles all survived in my testing.
Component variants. Property overrides, boolean properties, instance swapping — all there.
Unlimited free files. No page limit, no viewer restrictions, no "free tier cap" modals. This alone is a massive differentiator vs Figma's 3-file free tier.
~200 plugins available. Essentials covered: icons, stock photos, content generators.

What's missing:

No FigJam equivalent
Dev Mode is basic — CSS/iOS/Android snippets, but no polished inspect panel
English UI is 85% translated — occasional Chinese text remains
No desktop app — browser only

Price: Free for individuals. Team: ¥29/user/month (~$4). Figma Professional: $15/user/month. 73% cheaper.

Mockplus — The prototyping specialist

Mockplus is less about pixel-perfect UI and more about rapid prototyping and wireframing. Think Balsamiq speed with Figma-like polish.

What's good:

3,000+ pre-built components for iOS, Android, and web. Assemble a prototype in under an hour.
Interaction designer is genuinely faster than Figma's. Fewer options, less cognitive load.
Built-in user testing analytics — click heatmaps, drop-off points, session time. Figma doesn't have this natively.
Native desktop app for Mac/Windows.

What's missing:

Vector editing is basic
No auto-layout equivalent
Limited design system features
Import limited to Sketch files

Price: Free for 3 projects. Pro: ¥199/year (~$28/year). Figma Professional: $180/year. 94% cheaper.

Lanhu — The handoff tool designers need

Lanhu isn't a design tool — it bridges design and development. Upload Figma/Sketch/PS files, developers get organized specs with measurements, CSS, assets, and version diffs.

What's good:

Automatic spec extraction — dimensions, spacing, colors, typography, multi-res assets
Version comparison — highlight diffs between design versions
Coordinate-specific comments — click a pixel to comment there
Auto-generated style guides from your designs

What's missing:

Not a design tool — you still need Figma/Sketch
English UI is rough (~60%, machine-translation quality)

Price: Free for 10 projects. Team: ¥25/user/month (~$3.50). Figma Dev Mode: $25/seat/month on Organization. 86% cheaper.

Comparison table

Feature	Figma	JsDesign	Mockplus	Lanhu
Vector design	Excellent	Very Good	Basic	N/A
Prototyping	Good	Good	Excellent	N/A
Dev handoff	Good	Basic	N/A	Excellent
Collaboration	Excellent	Very Good	N/A	Good
Plugins	2,000+	~200	N/A	N/A
Desktop app	Yes	No	Yes	No
Free tier	3 files	Unlimited	3 projects	10 projects
Paid/seat/mo	$15	~$4	~$2.30	~$3.50

Who should switch?

Try JsDesign if: You're a solo designer or small team tired of Figma's pricing. You do standard UI work and can tolerate occasional Chinese UI text. 73% savings for 90% feature match.

Add Mockplus if: You prototype heavily and need user testing. Not a Figma replacement — an addition. At $28/year it's practically free.

Add Lanhu if: Design-to-dev handoff is your bottleneck. Developers asking "what font?" on Slack constantly. Solves this better than Figma Dev Mode at 1/10th the price.

Stay with Figma if: You need the plugin ecosystem or work on large teams with established workflows. Figma is still the best overall product — these win on price and specific workflows.

I'm documenting Chinese software tools that deserve global attention at ToolBridge. No hype, no affiliate reviews — just honest comparisons with real pricing.