Granite 4.2 30B vs Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E

At a Glance

Compare
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.16Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026Not reported
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.65Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026Not reported
Context windowMaximum documented tokens131K10,000K
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 30BLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E
DeveloperIBMMeta
FamilyGranite 4 2Llama 4 Scout 17b 16e
ModelGranite 4.2 30BLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E
VersionGranite 4.2 30BLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-08-252025-04-05
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131K10,000K
Total parameters29.3B108.6B
Active parametersUnknown17B
Licenseapache-2.0other
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard)Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, tools

Granite 4.2 30B Capabilities

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

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers1
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Granite 4.2 30B vs Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E FAQs

Is Granite 4.2 30B or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Granite 4.2 30B and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Granite 4.2 30B or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E?+

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 4.2 30B or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E has the larger sourced context window. Granite 4.2 30B supports 131K and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E supports 10,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Granite 4.2 30B or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E?+

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 Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Granite 4.2 30B is open weight; Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E is open weight.

Can Granite 4.2 30B and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E understand images?+

Granite 4.2 30B is not documented with image input; Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Granite 4.2 30B or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Granite 4.2 30B is — and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E is —.

Do Granite 4.2 30B and Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E support reasoning and tool use?+

Granite 4.2 30B: reasoning and tool calling. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E: tool calling and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Granite 4.2 30B or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E?+

Granite 4.2 30B has 1 sourced provider route; Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E has 1, a tie.

Which offers better value, Granite 4.2 30B or Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E?+

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