GPT-6.1 Terra (High) vs Granite 4.2 3B
Which is better for the money: GPT-6.1 Terra (High) by OpenAI or Granite 4.2 3B by IBM? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-6.1 Terra (High) scores 34.8 points higher (43.9 vs 9.1) but costs 16× as much to run the benchmark ($239 vs $14.9; mid-range vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-6.1 Terra (High) when you need intelligence above 9.1, and Granite 4.2 3B when 9.1 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-6.1 Terra (High) | Granite 4.2 3B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 43.9 | 9.1 | −79.3% Granite 4.2 3B is 79.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $238.53 | $14.91 | −93.7% Granite 4.2 3B is 93.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.16s | 63.71s | +470.9% Granite 4.2 3B is 470.9% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.00 / $5.00 | $0.03 / $0.12 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Granite 4.2 3B vs GPT-6.1 Terra (High): 79.3% less intelligence, 93.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 470.9% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6.1 Terra (High) 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-6.1 Terra (High)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-6-1-terra-high/granite-4-2-3b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-1-terra-high/granite-4-2-3b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill