Granite 4.2 3B vs Kimi K2.7 Code
Which is better for the money: Granite 4.2 3B by IBM or Kimi K2.7 Code by Kimi? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-09.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Kimi K2.7 Code scores 17.2 points higher (26.3 vs 9.1) but costs 67× as much to run the benchmark ($993 vs $14.9; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Kimi K2.7 Code when you need intelligence above 9.1, and Granite 4.2 3B when 9.1 is enough.
| Metric | Granite 4.2 3B | Kimi K2.7 Code | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.1 | 26.3 | +189.0% Kimi K2.7 Code is 2.9× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.86 | $992.88 | +6581.6% Kimi K2.7 Code is 67× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 12.05s | 41.22s | +242.1% Kimi K2.7 Code is 242.1% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.03 / $0.12 | $0.95 / $4.00 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Kimi K2.7 Code vs Granite 4.2 3B: 189.0% more intelligence, 6581.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 242.1% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Granite 4.2 3B is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Kimi K2.7 Code is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
Granite 4.2 3BKimi K2.7 CodeToday'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-4-2-3b/kimi-k2-7-code · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/granite-4-2-3b/kimi-k2-7-code?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill