ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B vs Grok Code Fast 1 vs Qwen3-VL Plus
Qwen3-VL Plus comes out ahead, 58 to 48 and 44 on our weighted score.
BaiduERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B
44/100- ECI—
- Price$0.42 / $1.25
- Context123K
xAIGrok Code Fast 1
48/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $1.50
- Context256K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3-VL Plus
58/100- ECI—
- Price$0.20 / $1.60
- Context262K
Qwen3-VL Plus is our pick
Qwen3-VL Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Grok Code Fast 1 (48) and ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B (44). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceGrok Code Fast 1Grok Code Fast 1 $0.525 · Qwen3-VL Plus $0.55 · ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B $0.627 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen3-VL PlusQwen3-VL Plus 262,144 · Grok Code Fast 1 256,000 · ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B 123,000 tokens
- Widest inputsERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B and Qwen3-VL PlusERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B : Text, Images · Grok Code Fast 1: Text · Qwen3-VL Plus: Text, Images
- Self-hostingERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B | Grok Code Fast 1 | Qwen3-VL Plus |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 57 | 60 | 60 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 23 | 36 | 37 |
| Overall | 100% | 44/100 | 48/100 | 58/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B Baidu | Grok Code Fast 1xAI | Qwen3-VL PlusAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.42 | $0.20 (best) | $0.20 (best) |
| Output | $1.25 (best) | $1.50 | $1.60 |
| Cached input | — | — | $0.04 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.627 | $0.525 (best) | $0.55 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Over 32K: $0.30 / $2.40 |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Median of 5 providers | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 123,000 tokens | 256,000 tokens | 262,144 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 16,000 tokens | 10,000 tokens | 32,768 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | No | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — | qwen3-vl-plus |
| API providers | 1 | 7 (best) | 6 |
| Released | Jun 30, 2025 | Sep 2, 2025 | Sep 23, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Mar 31, 2025 | — | Apr 2025 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B $6.70
- Grok Code Fast 1$5.00
- Qwen3-VL Plus$5.20
Which should you choose?
Which is better: ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B , Grok Code Fast 1 or Qwen3-VL Plus?
Qwen3-VL Plus is the better all-round choice, scoring 58/100 against Grok Code Fast 1 (48) and ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B (44). It leads on inputs & features. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B , Grok Code Fast 1 or Qwen3-VL Plus?
Grok Code Fast 1 is cheaper at $0.20 input / $1.50 output per million tokens (median across 5 API providers). Qwen3-VL Plus costs $0.20 input / $1.60 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price); ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B costs $0.42 input / $1.25 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.525 per million tokens for Grok Code Fast 1 versus $0.55 for Qwen3-VL Plus (1× as much) and $0.627 for ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B (1.2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B has not been scored yet, Grok Code Fast 1 has not been scored yet and Qwen3-VL Plus has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B , Grok Code Fast 1 and Qwen3-VL Plus yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Note that ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B does not support tool calling, which most coding agents need.
Which has the bigger context window?
Qwen3-VL Plus has the largest context window at 262,144 tokens, against 256,000 for Grok Code Fast 1 and 123,000 for ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B . Maximum output per response: ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B up to 16,000, Grok Code Fast 1 up to 10,000, Qwen3-VL Plus up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B accepts text and images; Grok Code Fast 1 accepts text; Qwen3-VL Plus accepts text and images. ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Grok Code Fast 1 and Qwen3-VL Plus is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3-VL Plus is the newest, released Sep 23, 2025. Grok Code Fast 1 came out Sep 2, 2025; ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B came out Jun 30, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B Mar 31, 2025, Qwen3-VL Plus Apr 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
