| Signal | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B | Delta | Grok 4.1 |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 29 | +29 | |
Context window size | 81 | +81 | |
Output Capacity | 65 | +65 | |
Pricing Tier | 0 | +0 | |
Recency | 96 | +96 | |
Versatility | 33 | +33 | |
| Overall Result | 6 wins | of 6 | 0 wins |
0
days ranked higher
0
days
30
days ranked higher
Baidu
xAI
Pricing unavailable
| Metric | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B | Grok 4.1 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 44 | 92 | Grok 4.1 |
| Rank | #202 | #6 | Grok 4.1 |
| Quality Rank | #202 | #6 | Grok 4.1 |
| Adoption Rank | #202 | #7 | Grok 4.1 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 120K | 2000K | Grok 4.1 |
| Pricing | $0.07/$0.28/M | -- | -- |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 29 | -- | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Context window size | 81 | -- | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Output Capacity | 65 | -- | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Pricing Tier | 0 | -- | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Recency | 96 | -- | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
| Versatility | 33 | -- | ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B |
Grok 4.1 clearly outperforms ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B with a significant 48.5-point lead. For most general use cases, Grok 4.1 is the stronger choice. However, ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B may still excel in niche scenarios.
Best for Quality
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
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
Grok 4.1 currently scores higher (92 vs 44), but the best choice depends on your specific use case, budget, and requirements.
ERNIE 4.5 21B A3B is ranked #202 and Grok 4.1 is ranked #6. Rankings are based on a composite score from multiple signals including benchmarks, community sentiment, and adoption metrics.
Pricing information may not be available for both models. Check individual model pages for the latest pricing details.