Apodex 1.1 vs Granite 4.2 30B
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or Granite 4.2 30B by IBM? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Apodex 1.1 scores 13.7 points higher (26.4 vs 12.7) but costs 8.5× as much to run the benchmark ($939 vs $111; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Apodex 1.1 when you need intelligence above 12.7, and Granite 4.2 30B when 12.7 is enough.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | Granite 4.2 30B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 12.7 | −51.9% Granite 4.2 30B is 51.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $110.83 | −88.2% Granite 4.2 30B is 88.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 55.20s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $3.00 | $0.16 / $0.65 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Granite 4.2 30B vs Apodex 1.1: 51.9% less intelligence, 88.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Apodex 1.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Granite 4.2 30B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
Apodex 1.1Granite 4.2 30BToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/granite-4-2-30b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/granite-4-2-30b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill