Granite 4.2 30B vs MiniMax-M3.1-Flash
Which is better for the money: Granite 4.2 30B by IBM or MiniMax-M3.1-Flash by MiniMax? 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
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash scores 30.0 points higher (42.7 vs 12.7) but costs 2.6× as much to run the benchmark ($283 vs $111; both mid-range class). Pick MiniMax-M3.1-Flash when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Granite 4.2 30B.
| Metric | Granite 4.2 30B | MiniMax-M3.1-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 12.7 | 42.7 | +236.2% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 3.4× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $110.83 | $283.18 | +155.5% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 2.6× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 57.71s | 22.62s | −60.8% MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is 60.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.16 / $0.65 | $0.15 / $0.60 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
MiniMax-M3.1-Flash vs Granite 4.2 30B: 236.2% more intelligence, 155.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 60.8% 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.
- MiniMax-M3.1-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Granite 4.2 30BMiniMax-M3.1-FlashToday'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/minimax-m3-1-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/granite-4-2-30b/minimax-m3-1-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill