Granite Embedding English r2 vs Grok 4.6
At a Glance
| Compare | Grok 4.6xAI | |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort | #21 of 4664.1 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort | #22 of 44$0.097 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort | #16 of 3856.7 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $2.00Xai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $6.00Xai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 8K | 500K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 28, 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
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | granite-embedding-english-r2 | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | IBM | xAI |
| Family | Granite Embedding English R2 | Grok 4 |
| Model | granite-embedding-english-r2 | Grok 4.6 |
| Version | granite-embedding-english-r2 | Grok 4.6 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2025-08-15 | Unknown |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | 2026-02-01 |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Embedding | Text |
| Context window | 8K | 500K |
| Total parameters | 149M | Unknown |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | Unknown |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| API available | Unknown | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No |
| Provider access | Unknown | Xai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | embeddings | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Granite Embedding English r2 Capabilities
Grok 4.6 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
| vs | Grok 4.5xAI | cross-developer peers | |
| vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peers | |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | cross-developer peers | |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | cross-developer peers | |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | cross-developer peers | |
| vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peers | |
| vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersembedding | |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | cross-developer peers | |
| vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peers | |
| vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peers | |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | cross-developer peers | |
| vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peers |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Granite Embedding English r2 vs Grok 4.6 FAQs
Is Granite Embedding English r2 or Grok 4.6 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Granite Embedding English r2 and Grok 4.6, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Granite Embedding English r2 or Grok 4.6?+
Only Grok 4.6 has a directly sourced input price: $2.00 per million tokens. Only Grok 4.6 has a directly sourced output price: $6.00 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Granite Embedding English r2 or Grok 4.6?+
Grok 4.6 has the larger sourced context window. Granite Embedding English r2 supports 8K and Grok 4.6 supports 500K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Granite Embedding English r2 or Grok 4.6?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Granite Embedding English r2 or Grok 4.6 be self-hosted?+
Granite Embedding English r2 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Granite Embedding English r2 is open weight; Grok 4.6 is not marked open weight.
Can Granite Embedding English r2 and Grok 4.6 understand images?+
Granite Embedding English r2 is not documented with image input; Grok 4.6 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Granite Embedding English r2 or Grok 4.6?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Granite Embedding English r2 is — and Grok 4.6 is —.
Do Granite Embedding English r2 and Grok 4.6 support reasoning and tool use?+
Granite Embedding English r2: none of these features are definitively sourced. Grok 4.6: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Granite Embedding English r2 or Grok 4.6?+
Granite Embedding English r2 has 0 sourced provider routes; Grok 4.6 has 1, so Grok 4.6 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Granite Embedding English r2 or Grok 4.6?+
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.