Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision vs ERNIE 4.5 Turbo: which model should you choose?
We compared Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision and ERNIE 4.5 Turbo on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision has the stronger average benchmark score; ERNIE 4.5 Turbo is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision is a multimodal model from Anthropic. It offers a 400,000-token context window, costs $13.96 per million input tokens and $56.28 per million output tokens, and averages 81.0 across the index's benchmark suite.
- Input
- $13.96 / 1M
- Output
- $56.28 / 1M
- Context
- 400,000
- Avg score
- 81.0
- Open weights
- No
ERNIE 4.5 Turbo
ERNIE 4.5 Turbo is a multimodal model from Baidu. It offers a 128,000-token context window, costs $13.75 per million input tokens and $54.36 per million output tokens, and averages 79.7 across the index's benchmark suite.
- Input
- $13.75 / 1M
- Output
- $54.36 / 1M
- Context
- 128,000
- Avg score
- 79.7
- Open weights
- No
Specification comparison
| Spec | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision | ERNIE 4.5 Turbo | Edge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input price / 1M | $13.96 | $13.75 | B |
| Output price / 1M | $56.28 | $54.36 | B |
| Context window | 400,000 | 128,000 | A |
| Max output | 8,192 | 32,768 | B |
| Average score | 81.0 | 79.7 | A |
| Arena Elo | 1429.6 | 1419.8 | A |
| Open weights | No | No | Tie |
Benchmark comparison
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision wins 8, ERNIE 4.5 Turbo wins 4, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.
| Benchmark | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision | ERNIE 4.5 Turbo | Gap | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-Pro | 82.5 | 84.0 | 1.5 | ERNIE 4.5 Turbo |
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3 | 73.0 | 4.3 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision |
| SWE-bench Verified | 72.2 | 67.5 | 4.7 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision |
| HumanEval | 85.4 | 86.4 | 1.0 | ERNIE 4.5 Turbo |
| MATH-500 | 84.8 | 86.4 | 1.6 | ERNIE 4.5 Turbo |
| AIME 2025 | 80.9 | 80.7 | 0.2 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision |
| LiveCodeBench | 75.7 | 70.5 | 5.2 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision |
| IFEval | 87.9 | 85.2 | 2.7 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision |
| TruthfulQA | 81.6 | 82.5 | 0.9 | ERNIE 4.5 Turbo |
| HellaSwag | 89.4 | 87.0 | 2.4 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision |
| MMMU | 73.8 | 73.7 | 0.1 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision |
| Arena Elo | 1429.6 | 1419.8 | 9.8 | Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision |
Price analysis
On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision costs about $24.54 per million tokens and ERNIE 4.5 Turbo costs about $23.90. ERNIE 4.5 Turbo is roughly 3% cheaper than Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision has the larger context window at 400,000 tokens, compared with 128,000 for ERNIE 4.5 Turbo. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.
Verdict
Across 12 shared benchmarks, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision wins 8, ERNIE 4.5 Turbo wins 4, and 0 are tied. On the index average, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision leads ERNIE 4.5 Turbo by 1.3 points (81.0 versus 79.7).
The price picture favours ERNIE 4.5 Turbo. The context picture favours Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.
If you need a single default, start with Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision for quality-sensitive work and ERNIE 4.5 Turbo for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.
Choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision if
- You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
- You need the larger 400,000-token context window.
Choose ERNIE 4.5 Turbo if
- Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
- You need the larger 32,768-token output limit.
FAQ
Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision better than ERNIE 4.5 Turbo?
On the index average, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision leads ERNIE 4.5 Turbo by 1.3 points (81.0 versus 79.7). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision wins 8 benchmarks, ERNIE 4.5 Turbo wins 4.
Which is cheaper, Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision or ERNIE 4.5 Turbo?
ERNIE 4.5 Turbo is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $23.90 per million tokens, versus $24.54 for Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision.
Which has the larger context window?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision has the larger context window at 400,000 tokens. ERNIE 4.5 Turbo has 128,000 tokens.
Are these models open weights?
Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision is proprietary; ERNIE 4.5 Turbo is proprietary.
Which should I choose for production?
If you need a single default, start with Claude 3.7 Sonnet Vision for quality-sensitive work and ERNIE 4.5 Turbo for high-volume, well-scoped tasks. Run both on a sample of your own traffic before locking in a choice.