Claude Opus 5 (Medium) vs Granite 4.2 3B
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (Medium) by Anthropic or Granite 4.2 3B by IBM? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5 (Medium) scores 35.7 points higher (44.8 vs 9.1) but costs 183× as much to run the benchmark ($2732 vs $14.9; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (Medium) when you need intelligence above 9.1, and Granite 4.2 3B when 9.1 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (Medium) | Granite 4.2 3B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 44.8 | 9.1 | −79.7% Granite 4.2 3B is 79.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,731.91 | $14.91 | −99.5% Granite 4.2 3B is 99.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 12.79s | 55.67s | +335.3% Granite 4.2 3B is 335.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.03 / $0.12 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Granite 4.2 3B vs Claude Opus 5 (Medium): 79.7% less intelligence, 99.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 335.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (Medium) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
- Granite 4.2 3B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
Claude Opus 5 (Medium)Granite 4.2 3BToday'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/claude-opus-5-medium/granite-4-2-3b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-medium/granite-4-2-3b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill