Granite 4.2 8B vs Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Granite 4.2 8B by IBM or Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) by Alibaba? 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
Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) scores 22.6 points higher (33.7 vs 11.1) but costs 25× as much to run the benchmark ($1336 vs $53.1; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 11.1, and Granite 4.2 8B when 11.1 is enough.
| Metric | Granite 4.2 8B | Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 11.1 | 33.7 | +203.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 3.0× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $53.07 | $1,336.09 | +2417.6% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 25× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 58.54s | 60.72s | +3.7% Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is 3.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.06 / $0.25 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) vs Granite 4.2 8B: 203.6% more intelligence, 2417.6% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 3.7% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Granite 4.2 8B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (High) scores 32.90 for $47.9.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Granite 4.2 8BQwen3.8 27B (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-4-2-8b/qwen3-8-27b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/granite-4-2-8b/qwen3-8-27b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill