Granite 4.1 30B vs Granite 4.2 30B
Why this pair: IBM's current and preceding flagship Granite language-model generations
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | granite-4.1-30b | Granite 4.2 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | IBM | IBM |
| Family | Granite 4 1 30b | Granite 4 2 |
| Model | granite-4.1-30b | Granite 4.2 30B |
| Version | granite-4.1-30b | Granite 4.2 30B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-04-29 | 2026-08-25 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 131K | 131K |
| Total parameters | 28.9B | 29.3B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | apache-2.0 |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Unknown | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Unknown | Deepinfra (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
14 comparable fields · 6 material differences · Editorially curated pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Granite 4.1 30B Capabilities
Granite 4.2 30B Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peerstext | |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | cross-developer peerstext | |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | cross-developer peerstext | |
 DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek | vs | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peerstext | |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext | |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | cross-developer peerstext | |
| vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peerstext |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Granite 4.1 30B vs Granite 4.2 30B FAQs
Is Granite 4.1 30B or Granite 4.2 30B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Granite 4.1 30B and Granite 4.2 30B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Granite 4.1 30B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Only Granite 4.2 30B has a directly sourced input price: $0.16 per million tokens. Only Granite 4.2 30B has a directly sourced output price: $0.65 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Granite 4.1 30B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Granite 4.1 30B is 131K and Granite 4.2 30B is 131K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Granite 4.1 30B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Granite 4.1 30B or Granite 4.2 30B be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Granite 4.1 30B is open weight; Granite 4.2 30B is open weight.
Can Granite 4.1 30B and Granite 4.2 30B understand images?+
Granite 4.1 30B is not documented with image input; Granite 4.2 30B is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Granite 4.1 30B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Granite 4.1 30B is — and Granite 4.2 30B is —.
Do Granite 4.1 30B and Granite 4.2 30B support reasoning and tool use?+
Granite 4.1 30B: tool calling. Granite 4.2 30B: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Granite 4.1 30B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Granite 4.1 30B has 0 sourced provider routes; Granite 4.2 30B has 1, so Granite 4.2 30B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Granite 4.1 30B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.