DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) vs Granite 4.2 30B
Which is better for the money: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) 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
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) scores 12.0 points higher (24.7 vs 12.7) but costs 2.2× as much to run the benchmark ($239 vs $111; both mid-range class). Pick DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Granite 4.2 30B.
| Metric | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Granite 4.2 30B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 24.7 | 12.7 | −48.6% Granite 4.2 30B is 48.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $238.91 | $110.83 | −53.6% Granite 4.2 30B is 53.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 2.74s | 54.96s | +1905.8% Granite 4.2 30B is 1905.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $1.20 | $0.16 / $0.65 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Granite 4.2 30B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning): 48.6% less intelligence, 53.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 1905.8% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Granite 4.2 30B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)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-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/granite-4-2-30b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning/granite-4-2-30b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill