Granite 4.2 3B vs Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Granite 4.2 3B by IBM or Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) by Meta? 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
Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) scores 36.0 points higher (45.1 vs 9.1) but costs 111× as much to run the benchmark ($1655 vs $14.9; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 9.1, and Granite 4.2 3B when 9.1 is enough.
| Metric | Granite 4.2 3B | Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.1 | 45.1 | +395.6% Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) is 5.0× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $14.91 | $1,655.27 | +11001.7% Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) is 111× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 59.94s | 28.35s | −52.7% Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) is 52.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.03 / $0.12 | $1.25 / $4.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) vs Granite 4.2 3B: 395.6% more intelligence, 11001.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 52.7% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Granite 4.2 3B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
- Muse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Granite 4.2 3BMuse Spark 1.3 (Xhigh)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-4-2-3b/muse-spark-1-3-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/granite-4-2-3b/muse-spark-1-3-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill