ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B vs Qwen Flash vs Qwen3 Coder Flash
Qwen Flash comes out ahead, 69 to 51 and 44 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
BaiduERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B
44/100- ECI—
- Price$0.42 / $1.25
- Context123K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Flash
69/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.40
- Context1M
- Alibaba (Qwen)
Qwen3 Coder Flash
51/100- ECI—
- Price$0.30 / $1.50
- Context1M
Qwen Flash is our pick
Qwen Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Qwen3 Coder Flash (51) and ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B (44). It leads on price and 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 priceQwen FlashQwen Flash $0.138 · Qwen3 Coder Flash $0.60 · ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B $0.627 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen Flash and Qwen3 Coder FlashQwen Flash 1,000,000 · Qwen3 Coder Flash 1,000,000 · ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B 123,000 tokens
- Widest inputsERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B : Text, Images · Qwen Flash: Text · Qwen3 Coder Flash: Text
- Self-hostingERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B Publishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B | Qwen Flash | Qwen3 Coder Flash |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 57 | 87 | 58 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 45 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 23 | 60 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 44/100 | 69/100 | 51/100 |
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 | Qwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen) | Qwen3 Coder FlashAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.42 | $0.05 (best) | $0.30 |
| Output | $1.25 | $0.40 (best) | $1.50 |
| Cached input | — | $0.01 (best) | $0.06 |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.627 | $0.138 (best) | $0.60 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Over 256K: $0.25 / $2.00 | Over 32K: $0.50 / $2.50 |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Alibaba API | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 123,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 16,000 tokens | 32,768 tokens | 65,536 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | No | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | qwen-flash | qwen3-coder-flash |
| API providers | 1 | 6 | 10 (best) |
| Released | Jun 30, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Mar 31, 2025 | Apr 2024 | 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
- Qwen Flash$1.30
- Qwen3 Coder Flash$6.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B , Qwen Flash or Qwen3 Coder Flash?
Qwen Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 against Qwen3 Coder Flash (51) and ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B (44). It leads on price and 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 , Qwen Flash or Qwen3 Coder Flash?
Qwen Flash is cheaper at $0.05 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). Qwen3 Coder Flash costs $0.30 input / $1.50 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 $0.138 per million tokens for Qwen Flash versus $0.60 for Qwen3 Coder Flash (4.4× as much) and $0.627 for ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B (4.6× 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, Qwen Flash has not been scored yet and Qwen3 Coder Flash 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 , Qwen Flash and Qwen3 Coder Flash 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?
Qwen Flash and Qwen3 Coder Flash have the largest context windows (1,000,000 and 1,000,000 tokens), against 123,000 for ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B . Maximum output per response: ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B up to 16,000, Qwen Flash up to 32,768, Qwen3 Coder Flash up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B accepts text and images; Qwen Flash accepts text; Qwen3 Coder Flash accepts text. 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; Qwen Flash and Qwen3 Coder Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen Flash is the newest, released Jul 28, 2025. Qwen3 Coder Flash came out Jul 28, 2025; ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B came out Jun 30, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: ERNIE 4.5 VL 424B A47B Mar 31, 2025, Qwen Flash Apr 2024, Qwen3 Coder Flash 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.
