DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) vs Granite 4.2 30B
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) by DeepSeek 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
Granite 4.2 30B scores 4.2 points higher (12.7 vs 8.5) but costs 4.4× as much to run the benchmark ($111 vs $25.4; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Granite 4.2 30B when you need intelligence above 8.5, and DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) when 8.5 is enough.
| Metric | DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) | Granite 4.2 30B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 8.5 | 12.7 | +49.4% Granite 4.2 30B is 49.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $25.37 | $110.83 | +336.9% Granite 4.2 30B is 4.4× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.84s | 44.22s | +273.5% Granite 4.2 30B is 273.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.32 / $0.89 | $0.16 / $0.65 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Granite 4.2 30B vs DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24): 49.4% more intelligence, 336.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 273.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- Granite 4.2 30B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
DeepSeek V3 (Dec '24)Granite 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/deepseek-v3/granite-4-2-30b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v3/granite-4-2-30b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill