| Signal | DeepSeek V3.1 | Delta | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 57 | -- | |
Context window size | 72 | +1 | |
Output Capacity | 64 | -1 | |
Pricing Tier | 1 | +0 | |
Recency | 97 | +2 | |
Versatility | 33 | -17 | |
| Overall Result | 3 wins | of 6 | 2 wins |
5
days ranked higher
2
days
23
days ranked higher
DeepSeek
Baidu
ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B saves you $10.50/month
That's $126.00/year compared to DeepSeek V3.1 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
| Metric | DeepSeek V3.1 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 50 | 51 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
| Rank | #120 | #105 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
| Quality Rank | #120 | #105 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
| Adoption Rank | #120 | #105 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 33K | 30K | DeepSeek V3.1 |
| Pricing | $0.15/$0.75/M | $0.14/$0.56/M | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 57 | 57 | DeepSeek V3.1 |
| Context window size | 72 | 71 | DeepSeek V3.1 |
| Output Capacity | 64 | 65 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
| Pricing Tier | 1 | 1 | DeepSeek V3.1 |
| Recency | 97 | 96 | DeepSeek V3.1 |
| Versatility | 33 | 50 | ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B |
DeepSeek V3.1 and ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B are extremely close in overall performance (only 1.3999999999999986 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
Best for Quality
DeepSeek V3.1
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B
22% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
DeepSeek V3.1
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
DeepSeek V3.1
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
DeepSeek V3.1
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by DeepSeek
ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B currently scores higher (51 vs 50), but the best choice depends on your specific use case, budget, and requirements.
DeepSeek V3.1 is ranked #120 and ERNIE 4.5 VL 28B A3B is ranked #105. Rankings are based on a composite score from multiple signals including benchmarks, community sentiment, and adoption metrics.
Compare the detailed pricing breakdown above to see which model offers better value for your usage pattern.