Granite 4.2 30B vs OCR 4.1

At a Glance

Compare
OCR 4.1Mistral AI
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.16Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026Not reported
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.65Deepinfra · Sep 22, 2026Not reported
Context windowMaximum documented tokens131KNot reported
Model facts checkedSep 2, 2026View model evidence →Aug 29, 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 30BOCR 4.1
DeveloperIBMMistral AI
FamilyGranite 4 2Mistral OCR
ModelGranite 4.2 30BOCR 4.1
VersionGranite 4.2 30BOCR 4.1
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-08-252026-07-16
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextImage, Document
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131KUnknown
Total parameters29.3BUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard)Mistral AI (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolsbounding-box-extraction, document-ai, ocr, structured-annotations

Granite 4.2 30B Capabilities

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

OCR 4.1 Capabilities

bounding-box-extractiondocument-aiocrstructured-annotations
Serving providers1
Canonical IDmistralai/mistral-ocr-4-1

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Granite 4.2 30B vs OCR 4.1 FAQs

Is Granite 4.2 30B or OCR 4.1 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Granite 4.2 30B and OCR 4.1, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Granite 4.2 30B or OCR 4.1?+

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 OCR 4.1?+

Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Granite 4.2 30B is 131K and OCR 4.1 is —.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Granite 4.2 30B or OCR 4.1?+

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 OCR 4.1 be self-hosted?+

Granite 4.2 30B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Granite 4.2 30B is open weight; OCR 4.1 is not marked open weight.

Can Granite 4.2 30B and OCR 4.1 understand images?+

Granite 4.2 30B is not documented with image input; OCR 4.1 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Granite 4.2 30B or OCR 4.1?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Granite 4.2 30B is — and OCR 4.1 is —.

Do Granite 4.2 30B and OCR 4.1 support reasoning and tool use?+

Granite 4.2 30B: reasoning and tool calling. OCR 4.1: image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Granite 4.2 30B or OCR 4.1?+

Granite 4.2 30B has 1 sourced provider route; OCR 4.1 has 1, a tie.

Which offers better value, Granite 4.2 30B or OCR 4.1?+

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