Where to describe the pros and cons of the related work in a paper? I just start writing a paper. This is also my first time doing so.

I have a problem describing the pros and cons of the related literature. I am not sure where I should place them.


Some of the papers address the pros and cons of related work in INTRODUCTION section so that they can claim why their research is superior. e.g. after pointing out the cons of the related work, one may claim that they work has fixed this and thus superior. So it is like the research motivation and work desctiption come directly after the pros and cons. They are all in INTRODUCTION.
The second style I have seen is writing them in RELATED WORK section.


Both ways seem fine to me. And I am even confused with these two sections! I notice that there is usually some related work described in both INTRODUCTION and RELATED WORK.

So where should I put them? INTRODUCTION or RELATED WORK?

FYI, I am in EECS field. But any generic advice is welcomed.
One criterion is how important these comparisons are for understanding your work.  At one extreme, you may be writing a paper whose sole purpose is to address a gap in the literature by doing something in a better way than other papers or using different hypotheses.  In that case, nobody can really understand your paper and its purpose without an explanation of how it relates to these other papers, so you would need to discuss this in the introduction.  At the other extreme, you may be mentioning related work only for completeness or because it might interest the reader, with no necessity at all for understanding your paper.  In that case, you might as well not clutter up the introduction with it.  Most papers are somewhere in between these extremes, in which case you'll have to make a judgment call (and may end up with a compromise, such as discussing some related work in the introduction and other papers in a section of their own).