Skip to content
ProviderBench home

Same-model provider benchmark

Baidu Qianfan vs Ionstream: LLM provider comparison

Compare Baidu Qianfan and Ionstream 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

Ionstream

5 indexed models

Headquarters
United States
Server regions
United States
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

Baidu Qianfan

4.58× typical advantage

3 exact models with complete recent speed data

Lowest token cost

Baidu Qianfan

$0.8309 / 1M

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

Most models available

Baidu Qianfan

7 models

Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities

Shared-model benchmark summary

MetricBaidu Qianfan(0)Ionstream(0)
SpeedBaidu Qianfan9.47 sIonstream43.38 s
TTFTBaidu Qianfan0.70 sIonstream1.72 s
TPSBaidu Qianfan57.0 tok/sIonstream12.0 tok/s
UptimeBaidu Qianfan99.34%Ionstream94.97%
BlendedBaidu Qianfan$0.8309 / 1MIonstream$1.3649 / 1M
Green value Better comparable resultRed value Worse comparable result

Visual comparison

Price and performance charts

Baidu QianfanIonstream
500-token response by shared model

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

Baidu Qianfan 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 Qianfan(0)Ionstream(0)
GLM 5.2Winner · Baidu Qianfan
Baidu Qianfan
Speed— Best comparable value
12.28 s
TTFT— Best comparable value
1.17 s
TPS— Best comparable value
45.0 tok/s
Uptime
99.58%
Context
1M
Route
baidu/fp8
Blended— Best comparable value
$1.368 / 1M
Ionstream
Speed— Worst comparable value
12.96 s
TTFT— Worst comparable value
1.33 s
TPS— Worst comparable value
43.0 tok/s
Uptime
N/a
Context
1M
Route
ionstream/fp4
Blended— Worst comparable value
$2.4 / 1M
DeepSeek V4 ProWinner · Baidu Qianfan
Baidu Qianfan
Speed— Best comparable value
9.47 s
TTFT— Best comparable value
0.70 s
TPS— Best comparable value
57.0 tok/s
Uptime— Best comparable value
98.74%
Context
1M
Route
baidu/fp8
Blended— Best comparable value
$0.9937 / 1M
Ionstream
Speed— Worst comparable value
43.38 s
TTFT— Worst comparable value
1.72 s
TPS— Worst comparable value
12.0 tok/s
Uptime— Worst comparable value
91.56%
Context
1M
Route
ionstream/fp4
Blended— Worst comparable value
$1.508 / 1M
DeepSeek V4 FlashWinner · Baidu Qianfan
Baidu Qianfan
Speed— Best comparable value
6.58 s
TTFT— Best comparable value
0.63 s
TPS— Best comparable value
84.0 tok/s
Uptime— Best comparable value
99.94%
Context
1M
Route
baidu/fp8
Blended— Best comparable value
$0.1311 / 1M
Ionstream
Speed— Worst comparable value
46.17 s
TTFT— Worst comparable value
4.50 s
TPS— Worst comparable value
12.0 tok/s
Uptime— Worst comparable value
98.38%
Context
1M
Route
ionstream/fp4
Blended— Worst comparable value
$0.1867 / 1M

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 Ionstream analysis

How Baidu Qianfan and Ionstream compare for AI inference

Baidu Qianfan and Ionstream share 3 indexed text models, including GLM 5.2, DeepSeek V4 Pro, DeepSeek V4 Flash. Baidu Qianfan 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; Ionstream has 5 models and lists 1 region. Verify data residency, privacy terms, limits, and production latency directly before choosing.

Related same-model benchmarks

Compare with other providers

Explore qualified alternatives with the most shared measured models. Recommendations include comparisons for both Baidu Qianfan and Ionstream.

Baidu Qianfan vs AtlasCloud

7 shared model benchmarks

Ionstream vs NovitaAI

5 shared model benchmarks

Baidu Qianfan vs DeepInfra

7 shared model benchmarks

Ionstream vs Parasail

5 shared model benchmarks

Baidu Qianfan vs DigitalOcean

7 shared model benchmarks

Ionstream vs Alibaba Cloud Int.

4 shared model benchmarks