GPT-5.6 Terra (High) vs Granite 4.2 30B
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Terra (High) by OpenAI or Granite 4.2 30B 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-5.6 Terra (High) scores 21.5 points higher (34.2 vs 12.7) but costs 6.9× as much to run the benchmark ($768 vs $111; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-5.6 Terra (High) when you need intelligence above 12.7, and Granite 4.2 30B when 12.7 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Terra (High) | Granite 4.2 30B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 34.2 | 12.7 | −62.9% Granite 4.2 30B is 62.9% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $767.78 | $110.83 | −85.6% Granite 4.2 30B is 85.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.58s | 65.19s | +890.7% Granite 4.2 30B is 890.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $2.00 / $12.0 | $0.16 / $0.65 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Granite 4.2 30B vs GPT-5.6 Terra (High): 62.9% less intelligence, 85.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 890.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Terra (High) 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.
GPT-5.6 Terra (High)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/gpt-5-6-terra-high/granite-4-2-30b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-terra-high/granite-4-2-30b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill