PaddleOCR VL 1.5 vs Granite 4.2 3B

At a Glance

Compare
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokensNot reported$0.030Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokensNot reported$0.12Deepinfra · Sep 23, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens131K131K
Model facts checkedAug 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

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

FieldPaddleOCR-VL-1.5Granite 4.2 3B
DeveloperBaiduIBM
FamilyPaddleocr VL 1 5Granite 4 2
ModelPaddleOCR-VL-1.5Granite 4.2 3B
VersionPaddleOCR-VL-1.5Granite 4.2 3B
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-01-292026-08-25
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131K131K
Total parameters958.6M3.7B
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0apache-2.0
Open weightsYesYes
API availableUnknownYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessUnknownDeepinfra (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generationchat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

PaddleOCR VL 1.5 Capabilities

chatgeneration
Serving providers0
Canonical IDPaddlePaddle/PaddleOCR-VL-1.5

Granite 4.2 3B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers1
Canonical IDibm-granite/granite-4.2-3b

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

PaddleOCR VL 1.5 vs Granite 4.2 3B FAQs

Is PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 3B better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both PaddleOCR VL 1.5 and Granite 4.2 3B, 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 3B?+

Only Granite 4.2 3B has a directly sourced input price: $0.030 per million tokens. Only Granite 4.2 3B has a directly sourced output price: $0.12 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 3B?+

Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. PaddleOCR VL 1.5 is 131K and Granite 4.2 3B is 131K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 3B?+

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 3B be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. PaddleOCR VL 1.5 is open weight; Granite 4.2 3B is open weight.

Can PaddleOCR VL 1.5 and Granite 4.2 3B understand images?+

PaddleOCR VL 1.5 is documented with image input; Granite 4.2 3B 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 3B?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. PaddleOCR VL 1.5 is — and Granite 4.2 3B is —.

Do PaddleOCR VL 1.5 and Granite 4.2 3B support reasoning and tool use?+

PaddleOCR VL 1.5: image input. Granite 4.2 3B: 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 3B?+

PaddleOCR VL 1.5 has 0 sourced provider routes; Granite 4.2 3B has 1, so Granite 4.2 3B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, PaddleOCR VL 1.5 or Granite 4.2 3B?+

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