Side-by-side comparison
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Qwen
Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct
Input / 1M
$0.6600
Output / 1M
$1.0000
| ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B | Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Baidu Qianfan | Qwen |
| Context window Maximum tokens (input + output) the model can process in a single request. Glossary → | 123,000 | 32,768 |
| Capabilities Optional capabilities the model advertises: vision (images), tools (function calling), json_mode (structured output). | text-only | text-only |
| Input $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens you send (prompt + context). Cheaper side highlighted. Glossary → | 0.2800 | 0.6600 |
| Output $ / 1M tokens Cost for tokens the model generates. Output is normally 3–5× pricier than input. Glossary → | 1.1000 | 1.0000 |
Frequently asked questions
Which is cheaper, ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B is cheaper than Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct on a 50/50 input/output blend by about $0.14 per 1M tokens. Exact savings depend on your input-vs-output ratio — use the cost calculator on this page for a workload-specific estimate.
Which has a larger context window, ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B or Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B has the larger context window at 123k tokens versus 33k tokens for Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct. That means ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B can ingest about 3.8x as much text per request.
What is the difference between ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B and Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct?
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B comes from Baidu Qianfan; Qwen2.5 Coder 32B Instruct comes from Qwen. They differ in pricing, context window, and supported capabilities — see the side-by-side table on this page for the exact figures, refreshed nightly.