Model Comparison

ERNIE 4.5 vs Gemini 3.6 FlashWhich is better in 2026?

Comparing ERNIE 4.5 and Gemini 3.6 Flash across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Verdict: ERNIE 4.5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash — which is better?

ERNIE 4.5 (by Baidu) and Gemini 3.6 Flash (by Google) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

On price, ERNIE 4.5 is roughly 2.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Gemini 3.6 Flash also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose ERNIE 4.5 if…

  • cost matters — it's about 2.3x cheaper per token

Choose Gemini 3.6 Flash if…

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jul 2026

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

ERNIE 4.5 and Gemini 3.6 Flashdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

ERNIE 4.5 costs less

For input processing, ERNIE 4.5 ($0.40/1M tokens) is 3.8x cheaper than Gemini 3.6 Flash ($1.50/1M tokens).

For output processing, ERNIE 4.5 ($4.00/1M tokens) is 1.9x cheaper than Gemini 3.6 Flash ($7.50/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Gemini 3.6 Flash is more expensive than ERNIE 4.5.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Jul 27 2026 • llm-stats.com
Baidu
ERNIE 4.5
Input tokens$0.40
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerNovita
Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash
Input tokens$1.50
Output tokens$7.50
Best providerGoogle
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Gemini 3.6 Flash accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to ERNIE 4.5's 128,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 65,536 tokens.

Baidu
ERNIE 4.5
Input128,000 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Mon Jul 27 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Gemini 3.6 Flash supports multimodal inputs, whereas ERNIE 4.5 does not.

Gemini 3.6 Flash can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

ERNIE 4.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

ERNIE 4.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

ERNIE 4.5 was released on 2025-06-25, while Gemini 3.6 Flash was released on 2026-07-21.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is 13 months newer than ERNIE 4.5.

ERNIE 4.5

Jun 25, 2025

1.1 years ago

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Jul 21, 2026

6 days ago

1.1yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemini 3.6 Flash has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-03-31, while ERNIE 4.5's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemini 3.6 Flash's training data extends to 2026-03-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without ERNIE 4.5's cutoff date.

ERNIE 4.5

—

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Mar 2026

Provider Availability

ERNIE 4.5 is available from Novita. Gemini 3.6 Flash is available from Google.

ERNIE 4.5

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M

Gemini 3.6 Flash

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $1.50/1MOutput Price:Output: $7.50/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Baidu
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Google
Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against ERNIE 4.5 and Gemini 3.6 Flash side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

ERNIE 4.5
✓ Preferred
Gemini 3.6 Flash
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Baidu
ERNIE 4.5
Google
Gemini 3.6 Flash

FAQ

Common questions about ERNIE 4.5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash.

Which is better, ERNIE 4.5 or Gemini 3.6 Flash?

ERNIE 4.5 (Baidu) and Gemini 3.6 Flash (Google) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does ERNIE 4.5 compare to Gemini 3.6 Flash in benchmarks?

ERNIE 4.5 scores GPQA: 74.0%, ARC-E: 60.7%, PIQA: 55.2%, Winogrande: 51.3%, CLUEWSC: 48.6%. Gemini 3.6 Flash scores CharXiv-R: 89.4%, OSWorld-Verified: 83.0%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 78.0%, MLE-Bench: 63.9%, SWE-Bench Pro: 58.7%.

Is ERNIE 4.5 cheaper than Gemini 3.6 Flash?

ERNIE 4.5 is 3.8x cheaper for input tokens. ERNIE 4.5 costs $0.40/M input and $4.00/M output via novita. Gemini 3.6 Flash costs $1.50/M input and $7.50/M output via google.

What are the context window sizes for ERNIE 4.5 and Gemini 3.6 Flash?

ERNIE 4.5 supports 128K tokens and Gemini 3.6 Flash supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between ERNIE 4.5 and Gemini 3.6 Flash?

Key differences include context window (128K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.40 vs $1.50/M), multimodal support (no vs yes). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes ERNIE 4.5 and Gemini 3.6 Flash?

ERNIE 4.5 is developed by Baidu and Gemini 3.6 Flash is developed by Google.

Related comparisons