Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Granite 4.2 30B
Which is better for the money: Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google or Granite 4.2 30B by IBM? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Gemini 2.5 Pro scores 3.4 points higher (16.1 vs 12.7) but costs 7.4× as much to run the benchmark ($823 vs $111; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 2.5 Pro when you need intelligence above 12.7, and Granite 4.2 30B when 12.7 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Granite 4.2 30B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.1 | 12.7 | −21.1% Granite 4.2 30B is 21.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $822.85 | $110.83 | −86.5% Granite 4.2 30B is 86.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 27.13s | 36.08s | +33.0% Granite 4.2 30B is 33.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $10.0 | $0.16 / $0.65 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Granite 4.2 30B vs Gemini 2.5 Pro: 21.1% less intelligence, 86.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 33.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 2.5 Pro 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.
Gemini 2.5 ProGranite 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/gemini-2-5-pro/granite-4-2-30b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-2-5-pro/granite-4-2-30b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill