| Signal | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B | Delta | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 33 | -33 | |
Pricing | 0 | 0 | |
Context window size | 81 | +10 | |
Recency | 90 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 65 | -- | |
| Overall Result | 1 wins | of 5 | 2 wins |
10
days higher
5
days
15
days higher
Baidu
Baidu
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B saves you $21.00/month
That's $252.00/year compared to ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40 | 40 | -- |
| Rank | #209 | #210 | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Quality Rank | #209 | #210 | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Adoption Rank | #209 | #210 | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Parameters | 21B | 28B | -- |
| Context Window | 120K | 30K | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Pricing | $0.07/$0.28/M | $0.14/$0.56/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 33 | 67 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
| Pricing | 0 | 1 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
| Context window size | 81 | 71 | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Recency | 90 | 90 | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Output Capacity | 65 | 65 | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Here's what the scores mean for these two models:
Scores 40/100 (rank #209), placing it in the top 28% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #210), placing it in the top 28% of all 290 models tracked.
With only a 0-point gap, these models are in the same performance tier. The practical difference in output quality is minimal - your choice should depend on pricing, latency requirements, and specific feature needs.
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B offers 50% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $5.25/month with ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B vs $10.50/month with ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B - a $5.25 monthly difference.
Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.
When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.
Code generation & review
Higher benchmark score (0/100) indicates stronger performance on coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring
Customer support chatbot
Faster response time (speed score 0/100) is critical for user-facing chat. ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (120K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.28/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily
Creative writing & content
Higher overall composite score (40/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content
Image understanding & OCR
Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B and ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B
50% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Baidu
| Capability | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Calling | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoningdiffers | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Baidu
Baidu
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B saves you $0.4620/month
That's 50% cheaper than ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B at 1,000 tokens/request and 100 requests/day.
Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.
| Parameter | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 120K | 30K |
| Max Output Tokens | 8,000 | 8,000 |
| Open Source | Yes | Yes |
| Created | Aug 12, 2025 | Aug 12, 2025 |
Both ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B and ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B score 40/100, making them extremely close competitors. Choose based on pricing, provider ecosystem, or specific capability requirements.
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B is ranked #209 and ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B is ranked #210 out of 290+ AI models. Rankings use a composite score combining benchmark performance (90%) from MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations, with capabilities and context window as tiebreakers (10%). Scores update hourly.
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B is cheaper at $0.28/M output tokens vs ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B's $0.56/M output tokens - 2.0x more expensive. Input token pricing: ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B at $0.07/M vs ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B at $0.14/M.
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B has a larger context window of 120,000 tokens compared to ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B's 30,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.