Claude Opus 4.7 vs Granite 4.2 30B

Model Markets Rankings

Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency

All rankings →
RankingClaude Opus 4.7Granite 4.2 30B
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v1.2#6 of 2278.9 scoreUnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#31 of 36$0.286 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 36-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.0#12 of 2251.8 scoreUnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort

Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Granite 4.2 30B
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,483.21100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7; 95% CI [1479.33960820, 1487.07067536]; votes 61256; rank 101,362.5592% of row best · rating · granite-4.2-30b; 95% CI [1351.93384890, 1373.17607017]; votes 3287; rank 177
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above1 benchmark winOverall lead0 benchmark wins

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

FieldAt a Glance
Anthropic · activeClaude Opus 4.7Verified Sep 3, 2026
IBM · activeGranite 4.2 30BVerified Sep 2, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldClaude Opus 4.7Granite 4.2 30B
DeveloperAnthropicIBM
FamilyClaude 4Granite 4 2
ModelClaude Opus 4.7Granite 4.2 30B
VersionClaude Opus 4.7Granite 4.2 30B
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-04-162026-08-25
Knowledge cutoff2026-01-01Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,000K131K
Total parametersUnknown29.3B
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownapache-2.0
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

14 comparable fields · 10 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Claude Opus 4.7 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price$5.00
Output price$25.00
Serving providers2
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-opus-4-7

Granite 4.2 30B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price$0.16
Output price$0.65
Serving providers1
Canonical IDibm-granite/granite-4.2-30b

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All text comparisons →
APairBContext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Granite 4.2 30B FAQs

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Granite 4.2 30B better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 4.7 and Granite 4.2 30B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Granite 4.2 30B?+

Claude Opus 4.7 is $5.00 and Granite 4.2 30B is $0.16 per million tokens, so Granite 4.2 30B is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 4.7 is $25.00 and Granite 4.2 30B is $0.65 per million tokens, so Granite 4.2 30B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Granite 4.2 30B?+

Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1,000K and Granite 4.2 30B supports 131K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.7 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 Claude Opus 4.7 or Granite 4.2 30B be self-hosted?+

Granite 4.2 30B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Opus 4.7 is not marked open weight; Granite 4.2 30B is open weight.

Can Claude Opus 4.7 and Granite 4.2 30B understand images?+

Claude Opus 4.7 is 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, Claude Opus 4.7 or Granite 4.2 30B?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 4.7 is 128K and Granite 4.2 30B is —.

Do Claude Opus 4.7 and Granite 4.2 30B support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Opus 4.7: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Granite 4.2 30B: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Opus 4.7 or Granite 4.2 30B?+

Claude Opus 4.7 has 2 sourced provider routes; Granite 4.2 30B has 1, so Claude Opus 4.7 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.7 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.

Send Feedback