Baidu Qianfan
7 indexed models
- Headquarters
China- Server regions
- N/a
- Model types
- 7 text
Same-model provider benchmark
Baidu Qianfan vs Phala: LLM provider comparison
Compare Baidu Qianfan and Phala on 5 exact shared text models. ProviderBench keeps speed, price, and catalog coverage separate so naturally faster model catalogs cannot distort the result.
Phala
18 indexed models
- Headquarters
United States- Server regions
- N/a
- Model types
- 18 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
1.88× typical advantage
5 exact models with complete recent speed data
Lowest token cost
$1.2907 / 1M
5 exact models using a 1K-input/500-output mix
Most models available
18 models
Complete catalog coverage across all indexed modalities
Shared-model benchmark summary
| Metric | Baidu Qianfan | Phala |
|---|---|---|
| Typical 500-token response | 14.79 s | 27.84 s |
| Typical response start | 1.04 s | 2.96 s |
| Typical output speed | 36.0 tok/s | 25.0 tok/s |
| Blended token price | $1.2907 / 1M | $1.9667 / 1M |
| Typical route uptime | 99.77% | 92.68% |
Visual comparison
Price and performance charts
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 5 measured models.
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 5 priced shared models.
| Model | Baidu Qianfan | Phala |
|---|---|---|
 GLM 5.2Winner · Baidu Qianfan z-ai/glm-5.2 | Baidu Qianfan
| Phala
|
 Kimi K2.6Winner · Baidu Qianfan moonshotai/kimi-k2.6 | Baidu Qianfan
| Phala
|
GLM 5.1Winner · Baidu Qianfan z-ai/glm-5.1 | Baidu Qianfan
| Phala
|
GLM 5Winner · Baidu Qianfan z-ai/glm-5 | Baidu Qianfan
| Phala
|
 DeepSeek V3.2Winner · Baidu Qianfan deepseek/deepseek-v3.2 | Baidu Qianfan
| Phala
|
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 Phala analysis
How Baidu Qianfan and Phala compare for AI inference
Baidu Qianfan and Phala share 5 indexed text models, including GLM 5.2, Kimi K2.6, GLM 5.1, GLM 5, DeepSeek V3.2. Baidu Qianfan has the stronger typical response-time result on the directly measured set.
Same-model speed evidence
5 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
5 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; Phala has 18 models and lists no regions. 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 Phala.
