Back to Value Frontier

Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B vs Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1

Head-to-head API cost, context, and performance comparison. Synced at 2:42:34 PM.

Executive Summary

When evaluating Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B against Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1, the pricing structure is a key differentiator. Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1 is approximately 9% more cost-effective per 1 million tokens overall.

However, when looking at raw reasoning capabilities, Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1 leads with a statistical ELO score of 1443. For tasks involving complex logic, coding, or instruction-following, developers might prefer Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1, provided their budget allows for the API burn rate.

Raw Technical comparison

Metric
Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B
Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1
Performance (ELO)
1443
1443
Input Cost / 1M
$0.14
$0.14
Output Cost / 1M
$0.56
$0.50
Context Window
30,000 tokens
131,072 tokens

Verdict

If you are looking for pure performance and capability, Tie is statistically superior. However, if API burn rate is the primary concern, Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1 wins out aggressively in pricing.

People Also Ask

Is Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B cheaper than Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1?

No. Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1 is the more cost-effective model, operating at a lower price point per 1 million tokens.

Which model has the larger context window?

The Nex AGI: DeepSeek V3.1 Nex N1 model has the advantage in memory, offering a massive 131,072 token limit for document ingestion.

Related Comparisons

Compare Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B vs NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni (free)Compare Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B vs Google: Gemma 4 31B (free)Compare Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B vs Google: Lyria 3 Pro PreviewCompare Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B vs MiniMax: MiniMax M2.5 (free)