ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT vs Seed 2.1 Pro

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.
FieldAt a Glance
Baidu · activeERNIE 4.5 0.3B PTVerified Aug 28, 2026
ByteDance Seed · activeSeed 2.1 ProVerified Sep 3, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldERNIE-4.5-0.3B-PTSeed 2.1 Pro
DeveloperBaiduByteDance Seed
FamilyErnie 4 5 0 3b PtSeed 2 1
ModelERNIE-4.5-0.3B-PTSeed 2.1 Pro
VersionERNIE-4.5-0.3B-PTSeed 2.1 Pro
Lifecycleactiveactive
ReleasedUnknown2026-06-23
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextText, Image, Video
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131KUnknown
Total parameters360.7MUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableUnknownYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessUnknownUnknown
Capabilitieschat, generationagents, chat, computer-use, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

10 comparable fields · 8 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT Capabilities

chatgeneration
Input price
Output price
Serving providers0
Canonical IDbaidu/ERNIE-4.5-0.3B-PT

Seed 2.1 Pro Capabilities

agentschatcomputer-usegenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price
Output price
Serving providers0
Canonical IDbytedance-seed/seed-2.1-pro

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All text comparisons →
APairBContext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT vs Seed 2.1 Pro FAQs

Is ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT or Seed 2.1 Pro better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT and Seed 2.1 Pro, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT or Seed 2.1 Pro?+

Neither model has a directly sourced input price in this comparison. Neither model has a directly sourced output price in this comparison.

Which has a larger context window, ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT or Seed 2.1 Pro?+

Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT is 131K and Seed 2.1 Pro is —.

Which performs better in benchmarks, ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT or Seed 2.1 Pro?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT or Seed 2.1 Pro be self-hosted?+

ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT is open weight; Seed 2.1 Pro is not marked open weight.

Can ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT and Seed 2.1 Pro understand images?+

ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT is not documented with image input; Seed 2.1 Pro is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT or Seed 2.1 Pro?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT is — and Seed 2.1 Pro is —.

Do ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT and Seed 2.1 Pro support reasoning and tool use?+

ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT: none of these features are definitively sourced. Seed 2.1 Pro: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT or Seed 2.1 Pro?+

ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT has 0 sourced provider routes; Seed 2.1 Pro has 0, a tie.

Which offers better value, ERNIE 4.5 0.3B PT or Seed 2.1 Pro?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback