Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude Opus 5.5vsERNIE 4.5 300B A47B
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 5.5vsERNIE 4.5 300B A47B

ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B is cheaper than Claude Opus 5.5 at $0.28/M vs $4/M input tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 and ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5.5ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B
Input price$4/M tokens$0.28/M tokens
Output price$20/M tokens$1.1/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens123K tokens
WeightsClosedOpen
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Jun 2025
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude Opus 5.5900 words
HarborTech Services: 5-Year LBO Underwriting Conventions: $m. Interest is charged on beginning-of-year balances, which avoids circularity. Term Loan (TL) amortization is 1% of the original $480m, or $4.8m per year. Mezz PIK accrues to principal. All FCF after mandatory debt service sweeps to the TL.
Read the full answer
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B521 words
1) Year-by-Year Table (FY2026–FY2030) Entry (FY2025): Revenue: $900m EBITDA: $120m Purchase Price: 12.0x EBITDA = $1,440m Transaction Fees: 2.0% × $1,440m = $28.8m (funded by equity) Total Leverage: 5.5x EBITDA = $660m Term Loan: 4.0x EBITDA = $480m (9.0% cash, 1.0% amort) Mezzanine: 1.5x EBITDA = $180m (12.0% cash…
Read the full answer

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

Claude Opus 5.52,253 words
"Hive & Tide" Langoustine, Beeswax, White Chocolate & Oscietra Caviar, Hay-Baked Celeriac, Fermented Green Strawberry, Sea Buckthorn I. The Concept Most coastal menus celebrate the meeting of sea and land. This dish is about a stranger, quieter meeting: the meadow and the seabed, the bee and the langoustine.
Read the full answer
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B766 words
Dish Title: "Umami Symphony: Black Garlic, Yuzu-Kissed Caviar, and Smoked Eel with Miso-Caramelized Cauliflower, Hojicha Foam, and Gold-Leaf Crisp" Conceptual Narrative: This dish explores the interplay of earthy, smoky, umami, and citrus notes, creating a harmonious balance of flavors and textures.
Read the full answer

Startup Pitch Teardown

Here's a pitch deck summary for a startup called "MindMeld AI": **Slide 1 - Vision:** "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration.…

Claude Opus 5.5936 words
The 3 Weakest Claims in the MindMeld AI Pitch "Decodes neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy. Works with any language, any device." (Slide 3) Why it's weak: It far exceeds the published state of the art. The best results for thought-to-text come from invasive implants.
Read the full answer
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B475 words
Weak Claim 1: Slide 1 Vision - "We're building the future of human-AI collaboration. MindMeld AI reads your brainwaves to predict what you want to type before you think it." Why it’s weak: The claim of predicting what a user wants to type "before you think it" is scientifically implausible and borders on hyperbole.
Read the full answer

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

Claude Opus 5.54,420 words
Contractor-Side Review of the Software Consulting Agreement Overall assessment: This agreement is heavily one-sided. Nearly every clause shifts risk, cost, or control to the Contractor, and several provisions interact to create compounding exposure.
Read the full answer
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B926 words
Here’s an analysis of the clauses that could be exploited against the contractor, along with suggested modifications and legal reasoning: 1. Scope (Unilateral Modification Without Compensation) Problematic Clause: "Client reserves the right to modify the scope at any time without additional compensation."
Read the full answer

Simple 7-Ingredient Recipe

Create a simple recipe for a delicious dish (sweet or savory) using only 7 common pantry ingredients. Include a creative name for the dish…

Claude Opus 5.5300 words
Midnight Silk Noodles Creamy, tangy peanut noodles with a gentle kick, ready faster than takeout. Serves: 2 Prep time: 5 minutes Cook time: 10 minutes Total time: 15 minutes The 7 Ingredients 8 oz (225 g) spaghetti (or any long noodle) ¼ cup creamy peanut butter 3 tablespoons soy sauce 1 tablespoon honey (or sugar) 1…
Read the full answer
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B261 words
Dish Name: Honey-Garlic Glazed Pantry Crispy Chickpeas Flavor Profile: Sweet & Savory with a Crunchy Kick Prep Time: 5 minutes Cook Time: 25 minutes Total Time: 30 minutes Ingredients (7 pantry staples): 1 can (15 oz) chickpeas, drained and rinsed 3 tbsp honey (or maple syrup) 2 tbsp soy sauce (or tamari) 3 garlic…
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Claude Opus 5.53,435 words
The Transistor in 1920: A Counterfactual Through 1980 First, a Reality Check on the Premise A transistor "invented" in 1920 would not have changed the world in 1920. The actual 1947 transistor rested on three foundations that did not exist yet: Quantum theory of solids.
Read the full answer
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B803 words
The invention of the transistor in 1920 instead of 1947 would have profound and far-reaching implications across technology, economics, and geopolitics, reshaping the trajectory of the 20th century. Below is a detailed analysis of the likely consequences through 1980, including second- and third-order effects: 1.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B costs 18x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude Opus 5.5
Input
$4.00
Output
$20.00
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B
Input
$0.28
14× cheaper
Output
$1.10
18× cheaper

ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B is cheaper on both: 14× input, 18× output.

Where to run it

4 hosts

Claude Opus 5.54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Amazon Bedrock$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·99.8% upAzure AI Foundry$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upAnthropic$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upGoogle Vertex AI$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% up
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B

No hosts listed on OpenRouter.

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B is developed by Baidu. Claude Opus 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B's 123K. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5.5 and ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 19 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4/M input tokens and ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B costs $0.28/M input tokens. ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B is $3.72/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 5.5 and ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoCommand A+ logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoGPT-6 Luna logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Fable 5.1 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1Same lab
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs Claude Opus 4.6Same size
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoHy3 logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs Hy3Same size
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoGPT-5.2 Chat logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs GPT-5.2 ChatNew provider
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoGPT-5.2 Pro logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs GPT-5.2 ProSame size
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoGPT-5.3 Chat logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs GPT-5.3 ChatNew provider
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logoGPT-5.3-Codex logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B vs GPT-5.3-CodexSame size

Model pages

Claude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 5.519 outputs, specs and price
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B logo
ERNIE 4.5 300B A47B58 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed