Granite 4.2 30B vs Trinity Large Thinking
Which is better for the money: Granite 4.2 30B by IBM or Trinity Large Thinking by Arcee AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Clear winner
Verdict
Pick Granite 4.2 30B
Trinity Large Thinking vs Granite 4.2 30B: 15.0% less intelligence, 110.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 81.3% faster end-to-end.
| Metric | Granite 4.2 30B | Trinity Large Thinking | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 12.7 | 10.8 | −15.0% Trinity Large Thinking is 15.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $110.83 | $232.95 | +110.2% Trinity Large Thinking is 2.1× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 44.22s | 8.25s | −81.3% Trinity Large Thinking is 81.3% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.16 / $0.65 | $0.25 / $0.80 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
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.
- Trinity Large Thinking is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Granite 4.2 30BTrinity Large ThinkingToday'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/trinity-large-thinking · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/granite-4-2-30b/trinity-large-thinking?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill