Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking vs Grok 3 mini latest

Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking (Novita AI, 131,072-token context) versus Grok 3 mini latest (xAI, 131,072-token context). Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking is cheaper by 3% on a blended token mix. Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking uniquely supports parallel tool calls and vision input. Grok 3 mini latest uniquely supports prompt caching. Use the live calculator below to plug your real usage shape into both, then route the winner via Agent Command Center for shadow A/B without code changes.

Bottom line — Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking vs Grok 3 mini latest

Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking and Grok 3 mini latest are priced within 3% of each other, so cost alone is not the deciding factor. The comparison comes down to capabilities, context window, and benchmark performance on the specific task shape your workload demands.

On capability surface area, the models diverge: Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking supports parallel tool calls where the other does not; Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking supports vision input where the other does not; Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking supports structured output (json schema) where the other does not. These differences are binary — either your workload needs the capability or it does not. Check whether any critical path in your agent pipeline depends on a capability only one model provides before committing to a migration.

For teams evaluating both models, the recommended path is a shadow A/B test: route production traffic through an OpenAI-compatible gateway, mirror a percentage to the candidate model, score both responses with an automated evaluator (faithfulness, tool-call correctness, latency), and compare cohort-level metrics over two weeks. Future AGI Agent Command Center supports this pattern with a single `base_url` change and built-in evaluators from the ai-evaluation SDK.

Side-by-side cost

Live workload comparison

Same workload run through both models. The cheaper one is highlighted.

3,000
0131,072
400
0131,072
5,000
01,000,000
Novita AI
$202/mo
Input $0.390/M · Output $0.390/M
xAI
$167/mo
Input $0.300/M · Output $0.500/M
At this workload, Grok 3 mini latest is 17% cheaper than Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking — a savings of $34.39/month ($413/year).
Crossover: Grok 3 mini latest is cheaper when output/input ≤ 0.82 (input-heavy workloads — RAG, retrieval). Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking wins above (long-form generation).
Current workload ratio: 0.13 (400/3000)
Production recipe — Agent Command Center
strategy: cost-optimized
primary:
  model: grok-3-mini-latest
  provider: xai
fallback:
  model: baidu-ernie-4-5-vl-28b-a3b-thinking
  provider: novita-ai
shadow: { sample_rate: 0.05 }   # mirror 5% of traffic to compare quality live
Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking Grok 3 mini latest
xAI
Input price $0.390/M $0.300/M
Output price $0.390/M $0.500/M
Context window 131,072 131,072
Max output 65,536 131,072
Function calling
Vision
Audio input
Reasoning
Prompt caching
Structured output
Pricing verified Aug 6, 2026 Aug 6, 2026
Cheaper option
~3% cheaper than the priciest in this pair
Larger context
131,072 tokens
More capabilities
4 of 6 capability flags advertised

Cost at scale: monthly spend at three usage volumes

Estimated monthly cost assuming 1,000 input + 200 output tokens per request — a realistic chat-agent shape. Adjust your own usage in the calculator at the top of this page for an exact number.

Scale Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking Grok 3 mini latest Delta
Startup
10K requests/day
$140 /mo $120 /mo $20.40/mo
Mid-market
100K requests/day
$1,404 /mo $1,200 /mo $204/mo
Enterprise
1M requests/day
$14,040 /mo $12,000 /mo $2,040/mo

At enterprise scale (1M requests/day), a difference of even ~10% in unit price compounds into thousands of dollars per month. Cached input pricing and batch tiers can shift this further — both are surfaced on each model's own page.

When to choose which

Picked from the data above — not vendor marketing. Match the rules to your workload, not the other way around.

Choose Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking

Your inputs include screenshots, diagrams, or product photos — Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking accepts image input natively, the other doesn't.

Choose Grok 3 mini latest

You re-send the same large system prompt across requests — Grok 3 mini latest supports prompt caching, cutting input cost on repeat hits.

Capability diff — what you gain and lose on the swap

A specific list of what each model has that the other doesn't. If your workload depends on a row in Only Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking, switching to Grok 3 mini latest means re-architecting that path (and vice versa).

Only on Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking
  • • Parallel tool calls
  • • Vision input
  • • Structured output (JSON schema)
Only on Grok 3 mini latest
  • • Prompt caching
Capabilities both share (3)
  • ✓ Function calling
  • ✓ Streaming
  • ✓ Native reasoning mode

Migration considerations

Concrete differences to wire through your stack before you flip traffic from one to the other.

  • Max output tokens differ: 65,536 on Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking vs 131,072 on Grok 3 mini latest. Long-form generation tasks may truncate differently — adjust streaming UI and chunking accordingly.
  • Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking has capabilities Grok 3 mini latest lacks: Parallel tool calls, Vision input, Structured output (JSON schema). Switching to Grok 3 mini latest means re-architecting any flow that depends on these.
  • Grok 3 mini latest has capabilities Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking lacks: Prompt caching. Worth wiring through the agent design before commit.
  • Provider changes from Novita AI to xAI. API authentication, rate-limit policy, regional availability, and billing all shift. Most teams route through an OpenAI-compatible gateway (e.g., Future AGI Agent Command Center) so the swap is a single `base_url` change instead of an SDK rewrite.

How to A/B test Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking vs Grok 3 mini latest in production

If you're stuck between the two, run them side-by-side on real traffic. Four steps the Future AGI team uses internally:

  1. 1. Point your existing OpenAI SDK at https://gateway.futureagi.com/v1. No code change beyond base_url and a virtual key.
  2. 2. Mark Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking primary, mirror 20% of traffic to Grok 3 mini latest in shadow mode. Both responses are logged; only the primary is served to users.
  3. 3. Score every shadow response with an evaluator — faithfulness, tool-call correctness, response latency, cost. Built-in evaluators in ai-evaluation cover the common axes.
  4. 4. Compare cohort-level metrics after two weeks. Switch primary when the candidate wins on what matters to your workload — and stays within your latency budget.

Full walkthrough on the Agent Command Center page.

FAQ — Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking vs Grok 3 mini latest

Which is cheaper, Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking or Grok 3 mini latest?

Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking is cheaper by roughly 3% on a blended input + output token mix. Input prices are $0.390/M for Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking versus $0.300/M for Grok 3 mini latest; output prices are $0.390/M versus $0.500/M. The exact savings depend on your input:output ratio — use the live calculator above to plug in your own request shape.

What is the context window of Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking versus Grok 3 mini latest?

Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking supports up to 131,072 tokens of context. Grok 3 mini latest supports up to 131,072 tokens. Grok 3 mini latest has the larger window by a factor of 1.0x, which matters for long-document RAG, multi-turn agent sessions, and tasks that need to keep an entire codebase in working memory.

Do Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking and Grok 3 mini latest both support tool calling?

Yes — both Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking and Grok 3 mini latest support native function calling. Both also support structured output via JSON schema, so an agent can be ported between them with the same tool definitions.

Can Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking and Grok 3 mini latest process images?

Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking accepts native image input. Grok 3 mini latest does not — you would need to route image-heavy workloads through Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking or add a separate vision model in front of Grok 3 mini latest.

Which model supports prompt caching for cost reduction?

Grok 3 mini latest supports prompt caching; the other does not. If your agent has a stable system prompt + retrieval context block that repeats across requests, Grok 3 mini latest gives you a 50–90% discount on those repeated input tokens at the provider level.

When should I choose Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking over Grok 3 mini latest?

Your inputs include screenshots, diagrams, or product photos — Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking accepts image input natively, the other doesn't.

When should I choose Grok 3 mini latest over Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking?

You re-send the same large system prompt across requests — Grok 3 mini latest supports prompt caching, cutting input cost on repeat hits.

How do I A/B test Baidu Ernie 4.5 VL 28B A3b Thinking against Grok 3 mini latest in production?

Route both through an OpenAI-compatible gateway like Future AGI Agent Command Center with shadow mode enabled. Send 100% of traffic to your primary model, mirror 10–20% to the candidate, score every response with an evaluator (faithfulness, tool-call correctness, response time), and compare cohort-level metrics for two weeks. Switch when the candidate wins on the metrics that matter to your workload and stays within your latency budget.