GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs Granite 4.2 3B
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI 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
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) scores 11.6 points higher (20.7 vs 9.1) but costs 22× as much to run the benchmark ($331 vs $14.9; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 9.1, and Granite 4.2 3B when 9.1 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Granite 4.2 3B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 20.7 | 9.1 | −56.0% Granite 4.2 3B is 56.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $331.24 | $14.91 | −95.5% Granite 4.2 3B is 95.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 80.67s | 55.67s | −31.0% Granite 4.2 3B is 31.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.25 | $0.03 / $0.12 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Granite 4.2 3B vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh): 56.0% less intelligence, 95.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 31.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
- Granite 4.2 3B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)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/gpt-5-4-nano/granite-4-2-3b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-4-nano/granite-4-2-3b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill