Back to Value Frontier

xAI: Grok 4 Fast vs Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B

Head-to-head API cost, context, and performance comparison. Synced at 2:34:23 PM.

Executive Summary

When evaluating xAI: Grok 4 Fast against Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B, the pricing structure is a key differentiator. Both models are remarkably similar in API costs.

However, when looking at raw reasoning capabilities, Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B leads with a statistical ELO score of 1443. For tasks involving complex logic, coding, or instruction-following, developers might prefer Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B, provided their budget allows for the API burn rate.

Raw Technical comparison

Metric
xAI: Grok 4 Fast
Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B
Performance (ELO)
1443
1443
Input Cost / 1M
$0.20
$0.14
Output Cost / 1M
$0.50
$0.56
Context Window
2,000,000 tokens
30,000 tokens

Verdict

If you are looking for pure performance and capability, Tie is statistically superior. However, if API burn rate is the primary concern, xAI: Grok 4 Fast wins out aggressively in pricing.

People Also Ask

Is xAI: Grok 4 Fast cheaper than Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B?

Yes. xAI: Grok 4 Fast is cheaper for both input and output generation compared to Baidu: ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B. Exploring alternatives often yields cost reductions.

Which model has the larger context window?

The xAI: Grok 4 Fast model has the advantage in memory, offering a massive 2,000,000 token limit for document ingestion.

Related Comparisons

Compare xAI: Grok 4 Fast vs NVIDIA: Nemotron 3 Nano Omni (free)Compare xAI: Grok 4 Fast vs Google: Gemma 4 31B (free)Compare xAI: Grok 4 Fast vs Google: Lyria 3 Pro PreviewCompare xAI: Grok 4 Fast vs MiniMax: MiniMax M2.5 (free)