PaddleOCR VL 1.5 vs Granite 4.2 30B
At a Glance
| Compare |  PaddleOCR VL 1.5Baidu | |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $0.16Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $0.65Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 23, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 131K | 131K |
| Model facts checked | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 2, 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 | PaddleOCR-VL-1.5 | Granite 4.2 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Baidu | IBM |
| Family | Paddleocr VL 1 5 | Granite 4 2 |
| Model | PaddleOCR-VL-1.5 | Granite 4.2 30B |
| Version | PaddleOCR-VL-1.5 | Granite 4.2 30B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-01-29 | 2026-08-25 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 131K | 131K |
| Total parameters | 958.6M | 29.3B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | apache-2.0 |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Unknown | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Unknown | Deepinfra (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
PaddleOCR VL 1.5 Capabilities
Granite 4.2 30B Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All text comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs |  DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | cross-developer peersimage, text |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
PaddleOCR-VL-1.5Baidu | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
PaddleOCR VL 1.5 vs Granite 4.2 30B FAQs
Is PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 30B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both PaddleOCR VL 1.5 and Granite 4.2 30B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 30B?+
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, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. PaddleOCR VL 1.5 is 131K and Granite 4.2 30B is 131K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 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 PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 30B be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. PaddleOCR VL 1.5 is open weight; Granite 4.2 30B is open weight.
Can PaddleOCR VL 1.5 and Granite 4.2 30B understand images?+
PaddleOCR VL 1.5 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, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. PaddleOCR VL 1.5 is — and Granite 4.2 30B is —.
Do PaddleOCR VL 1.5 and Granite 4.2 30B support reasoning and tool use?+
PaddleOCR VL 1.5: image input. Granite 4.2 30B: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 30B?+
PaddleOCR VL 1.5 has 0 sourced provider routes; Granite 4.2 30B has 1, so Granite 4.2 30B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 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.