GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) vs Granite 4.2 3B
Which is better for the money: GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) by Z AI or Granite 4.2 3B 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
GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) scores 17.0 points higher (26.1 vs 9.1) but costs 100× as much to run the benchmark ($1487 vs $14.9; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) when you need intelligence above 9.1, and Granite 4.2 3B when 9.1 is enough.
| Metric | GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) | Granite 4.2 3B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.1 | 9.1 | −65.1% Granite 4.2 3B is 65.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,486.78 | $14.91 | −99.0% Granite 4.2 3B is 99.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 63.24s | 35.30s | −44.2% Granite 4.2 3B is 44.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.28 / $4.07 | $0.03 / $0.12 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
Granite 4.2 3B vs GLM-5.1 (Reasoning): 65.1% less intelligence, 99.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 44.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GLM-5.1 (Reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
- Granite 4.2 3B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
GLM-5.1 (Reasoning)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/glm-5-1/granite-4-2-3b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/glm-5-1/granite-4-2-3b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill