Granite 4.2 30B vs Grok 4.6 (Low)
Which is better for the money: Granite 4.2 30B by IBM or Grok 4.6 (Low) by SpaceXAI? 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
Grok 4.6 (Low) scores 22.4 points higher (35.1 vs 12.7) but costs 5.5× as much to run the benchmark ($614 vs $111; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Grok 4.6 (Low) when you need intelligence above 12.7, and Granite 4.2 30B when 12.7 is enough.
| Metric | Granite 4.2 30B | Grok 4.6 (Low) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 12.7 | 35.1 | +176.4% Grok 4.6 (Low) is 2.8× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $110.83 | $613.92 | +453.9% Grok 4.6 (Low) is 5.5× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 57.71s | 13.02s | −77.4% Grok 4.6 (Low) is 77.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.16 / $0.65 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
Grok 4.6 (Low) vs Granite 4.2 30B: 176.4% more intelligence, 453.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 77.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Granite 4.2 30B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Flash scores 37.90 for $110.
- Grok 4.6 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
Granite 4.2 30BGrok 4.6 (Low)Today'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/granite-4-2-30b/grok-4-6-low · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/granite-4-2-30b/grok-4-6-low?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill