The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

ERNIE 4.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next leads the LLM Stats Score 50.6 to -13.1.

Baidu · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next leads the overall LLM Stats Score 50.6 to -13.1, ranking #14 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Qwen3.8-Flash-Next wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose ERNIE 4.5

  • you want predictable pricing at $0.40/M input and $4.00/M output

Choose Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

  • overall performance matters — it scores 50.6 and ranks #14 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

ERNIE 4.5
Baidu
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
-13.1
#350
50.6
#14
Reasoning
-13.0
#344
50.8
#12
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
0 of 1
1 of 1
Input price
$0.40 / M
— / M
Output price
$4.00 / M
— / M
Context window
128,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
ERNIE 4.5
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Math
-15.9#314
33.3#50
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

20 reported for ERNIE 4.5 · 22 for Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

1 shared

ERNIE 4.5 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Model Size

Parameter count comparison

104.0B diff

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next has 104.0B more parameters than ERNIE 4.5, making it 495.2% larger.

Baidu
ERNIE 4.5
21.0Bparameters
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
125.0Bparameters
21.0B
ERNIE 4.5
125.0B
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only ERNIE 4.5 specifies input context (128,000 tokens). Only ERNIE 4.5 specifies output context (65,536 tokens).

Baidu
ERNIE 4.5
Input128,000 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Aug 31 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next supports multimodal inputs, whereas ERNIE 4.5 does not.

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

ERNIE 4.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

ERNIE 4.5 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next uses Qwen Community License 1.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

ERNIE 4.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Qwen Community License 1.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

ERNIE 4.5 was released on 2025-06-25, while Qwen3.8-Flash-Next was released on 2026-08-26.

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is 14 months newer than ERNIE 4.5.

ERNIE 4.5

Jun 25, 2025

1.2 years ago

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next

Aug 26, 2026

4 days ago

1.2yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against ERNIE 4.5 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

ERNIE 4.5
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-Flash-Next
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about ERNIE 4.5 vs Qwen3.8-Flash-Next.

Which is better, ERNIE 4.5 or Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Qwen3.8-Flash-Next leads the LLM Stats Score 50.6 to -13.1. ERNIE 4.5 is made by Baidu and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does ERNIE 4.5 compare to Qwen3.8-Flash-Next in benchmarks?

ERNIE 4.5 scores GPQA: 74.0%, ARC-E: 60.7%, PIQA: 55.2%, Winogrande: 51.3%, CLUEWSC: 48.6%. Qwen3.8-Flash-Next scores MathVision: 95.7%, LiveCodeBench v6: 91.9%, GPQA: 91.7%, CharXiv-R: 90.6%, RealWorldQA: 88.5%.

What are the context window sizes for ERNIE 4.5 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

ERNIE 4.5 supports 128K tokens and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next supports an unknown number of 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 Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (-13.1 vs 50.6), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Proprietary vs Qwen Community License 1.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes ERNIE 4.5 and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next?

ERNIE 4.5 is developed by Baidu and Qwen3.8-Flash-Next is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons