GPT-6 Astra (Low) vs Granite 4.2 3B
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Astra (Low) 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-6 Astra (Low) scores 36.7 points higher (45.8 vs 9.1) but costs 103× as much to run the benchmark ($1537 vs $14.9; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick GPT-6 Astra (Low) when you need intelligence above 9.1, and Granite 4.2 3B when 9.1 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-6 Astra (Low) | Granite 4.2 3B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 45.8 | 9.1 | −80.1% Granite 4.2 3B is 80.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,536.78 | $14.91 | −99.0% Granite 4.2 3B is 99.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 12.36s | 59.94s | +385.0% Granite 4.2 3B is 385.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.03 / $0.12 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
Granite 4.2 3B vs GPT-6 Astra (Low): 80.1% less intelligence, 99.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 385.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Astra (Low) 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.
GPT-6 Astra (Low)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-astra-low/granite-4-2-3b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-astra-low/granite-4-2-3b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill