Granite 4.2 30B vs Kimi K2 Thinking

At a Glance

Compare
Kimi K2 ThinkingMoonshot AI
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.16Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026$0.60Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.65Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026$2.50Openrouter · Sep 22, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens131K262K
Model facts checkedSep 2, 2026View model evidence →Aug 28, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldGranite 4.2 30BKimi-K2-Thinking
DeveloperIBMMoonshot AI
FamilyGranite 4 2Kimi K2 Thinking
ModelGranite 4.2 30BKimi-K2-Thinking
VersionGranite 4.2 30BKimi-K2-Thinking
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-08-252025-11-06
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131K262K
Total parameters29.3B1T
Active parametersUnknown32B
Licenseapache-2.0other
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard)Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

Granite 4.2 30B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers1
Canonical IDibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b

Kimi K2 Thinking Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDmoonshotai/Kimi-K2-Thinking

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Granite 4.2 30B vs Kimi K2 Thinking FAQs

Is Granite 4.2 30B or Kimi K2 Thinking better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Granite 4.2 30B and Kimi K2 Thinking, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Granite 4.2 30B or Kimi K2 Thinking?+

Granite 4.2 30B is $0.16 and Kimi K2 Thinking is $0.60 per million tokens, so Granite 4.2 30B is cheaper on this metric. Granite 4.2 30B is $0.65 and Kimi K2 Thinking is $2.50 per million tokens, so Granite 4.2 30B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Granite 4.2 30B or Kimi K2 Thinking?+

Kimi K2 Thinking has the larger sourced context window. Granite 4.2 30B supports 131K and Kimi K2 Thinking supports 262K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Granite 4.2 30B or Kimi K2 Thinking?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Granite 4.2 30B or Kimi K2 Thinking be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Granite 4.2 30B is open weight; Kimi K2 Thinking is open weight.

Can Granite 4.2 30B and Kimi K2 Thinking understand images?+

Granite 4.2 30B is not documented with image input; Kimi K2 Thinking is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Granite 4.2 30B or Kimi K2 Thinking?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Granite 4.2 30B is — and Kimi K2 Thinking is 131K.

Do Granite 4.2 30B and Kimi K2 Thinking support reasoning and tool use?+

Granite 4.2 30B: reasoning and tool calling. Kimi K2 Thinking: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Granite 4.2 30B or Kimi K2 Thinking?+

Granite 4.2 30B has 1 sourced provider route; Kimi K2 Thinking has 2, so Kimi K2 Thinking has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Granite 4.2 30B or Kimi K2 Thinking?+

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.

Send Feedback