Skip to content

Same-model provider benchmark

Baidu Qianfan vs Friendli: LLM provider comparison

Compare Baidu Qianfan and Friendli on 3 exact shared text models. ProviderBench keeps speed, price, and catalog coverage separate so naturally faster model catalogs cannot distort the result.

Baidu Qianfan

7 indexed models

Headquarters
China
Server regions
N/a
Model types
7 text

Friendli

5 indexed models

Headquarters
United States
Server regions
N/a
Model types
5 text

At a glance

Metric winners

There is no overall score. Each winner answers one specific question using only directly comparable data.

Fastest on shared models

2.43× typical advantage

3 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

$1.2147 / 1M

3 exact models using a 1K-input/500-output mix

Most models available

7 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

MetricBaidu QianfanFriendli
Typical 500-token response16.87 s5.41 s
Typical response start1.05 s0.95 s
Typical output speed32.0 tok/s112.0 tok/s
Blended token price$1.2147 / 1M$1.8778 / 1M
Typical route uptime99.53%99.39%

Visual comparison

Price and performance charts

Baidu QianfanFriendli
500-token response by shared model

Estimated seconds using recent median response-start and output-speed data. Lower is better.

Friendli has the lower typical same-model response ratio across 3 measured models.

Blended token price by shared model

USD per 1 million tokens using a 1,000-input/500-output mix. Lower is better.

Baidu Qianfan has the lower typical price ratio across 3 priced shared models.

Shared text models

3 exact models · newest first

ModelBaidu QianfanFriendli
GLM 5.2Winner · Friendli

z-ai/glm-5.2

Baidu Qianfan
Blended price
$1.67 / 1M
500-token response
11.25 s
Response starts
1.05 s
Output speed
49.0 tok/s
Route uptime
99.53%
Context
1M
Route
baidu/fp8
Friendli
Blended price
$2.4 / 1M
500-token response
4.64 s
Response starts
0.57 s
Output speed
123.0 tok/s
Route uptime
99.88%
Context
1M
Route
friendli
GLM 5.1Winner · Friendli

z-ai/glm-5.1

Baidu Qianfan
Blended price
$1.68 / 1M
500-token response
16.87 s
Response starts
1.24 s
Output speed
32.0 tok/s
Route uptime
79.26%
Context
202.8K
Route
baidu/fp8
Friendli
Blended price
$2.4 / 1M
500-token response
5.41 s
Response starts
0.95 s
Output speed
112.0 tok/s
Route uptime
97.46%
Context
202.8K
Route
friendli
DeepSeek V3.2Winner · Baidu Qianfan

deepseek/deepseek-v3.2

Baidu Qianfan
Blended price
$0.294 / 1M
500-token response
27.36 s
Response starts
1.04 s
Output speed
19.0 tok/s
Route uptime
100.00%
Context
131.1K
Route
baidu/fp8
Friendli
Blended price
$0.8333 / 1M
500-token response
16.17 s
Response starts
1.02 s
Output speed
33.0 tok/s
Route uptime
99.39%
Context
163.8K
Route
friendli

A per-model winner combines blended price and estimated 500-token response time with equal proportional weight. Ties and rows missing either measurement receive no badge. Comparison data calculated . Values use one deterministic route per provider and model; missing measurements remain visible as N/a.

Baidu Qianfan vs Friendli analysis

How Baidu Qianfan and Friendli compare for AI inference

Baidu Qianfan and Friendli share 3 indexed text models, including GLM 5.2, GLM 5.1, DeepSeek V3.2. Friendli has the stronger typical response-time result on the directly measured set.

Same-model speed evidence

3 shared models currently have complete response-start and output-speed measurements on both providers. The speed comparison uses per-model ratios before taking the median, so naturally faster model catalogs do not improve the result.

Token pricing on one workload

3 shared models have complete input and output prices on both providers. Prices use the same 1,000-input/500-output-token mix and are normalized to one million tokens for readability.

Catalog and deployment differences

Baidu Qianfan has 7 indexed models and lists no published server regions; Friendli has 5 models and lists no regions. Verify data residency, privacy terms, limits, and production latency directly before choosing.