| Signal | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B | Delta | Mistral Small 3.2 24B |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 33 | -33 | |
Pricing | 1 | +1 | |
Context window size | 81 | 0 | |
Recency | 83 | +2 | |
Output Capacity | 68 | +48 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 5 | 2 wins |
7
days higher
5
days
18
days higher
Baidu
Mistral AI
Mistral Small 3.2 24B saves you $65.50/month
That's $786.00/year compared to ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B | Mistral Small 3.2 24B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 40 | 40 | -- |
| Rank | #228 | #229 | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B |
| Quality Rank | #228 | #229 | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B |
| Adoption Rank | #228 | #229 | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B |
| Parameters | 300B | 24B | -- |
| Context Window | 123K | 128K | Mistral Small 3.2 24B |
| Pricing | $0.28/$1.10/M | $0.07/$0.20/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 33 | 67 | Mistral Small 3.2 24B |
| Pricing | 1 | 0 | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B |
| Context window size | 81 | 81 | Mistral Small 3.2 24B |
| Recency | 83 | 81 | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B |
| Output Capacity | 68 | 20 | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B |
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 #228), placing it in the top 22% of all 290 models tracked.
Scores 40/100 (rank #229), placing it in the top 21% 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.
Mistral Small 3.2 24B offers 80% better value per quality point. At 1M tokens/day, you'd spend $4.13/month with Mistral Small 3.2 24B vs $20.70/month with ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B - a $16.57 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. Mistral Small 3.2 24B also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support
Long document analysis
Larger context window (128K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass
Batch data extraction
Lower output pricing ($0.20/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 300B A47B and Mistral Small 3.2 24B 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 300B A47B
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Mistral Small 3.2 24B
80% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Baidu
| Capability | ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B | Mistral Small 3.2 24B |
|---|---|---|
| Vision (Image Input)differs | ||
| Function Callingdiffers | ||
| Streaming | ||
| JSON Mode | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| Web Search | ||
| Image Output |
Baidu
Mistral AI
Mistral Small 3.2 24B saves you $1.45/month
That's 79% cheaper than ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B 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 300B A47B | Mistral Small 3.2 24B |
|---|---|---|
| Context Window | 123K | 128K |
| Max Output Tokens | 12,000 | -- |
| Open Source | Yes | Yes |
| Created | Jun 30, 2025 | Jun 20, 2025 |
Both ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B and Mistral Small 3.2 24B score 40/100, making them extremely close competitors. Choose based on pricing, provider ecosystem, or specific capability requirements.
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B is ranked #228 and Mistral Small 3.2 24B is ranked #229 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.
Mistral Small 3.2 24B is cheaper at $0.20/M output tokens vs ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B 's $1.10/M output tokens - 5.5x more expensive. Input token pricing: ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B at $0.28/M vs Mistral Small 3.2 24B at $0.07/M.
Mistral Small 3.2 24B has a larger context window of 128,000 tokens compared to ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B 's 123,000 tokens. A larger context window means the model can process longer documents and conversations.