Qwen3.8 27B vs Granite 4.2 30B
Why this pair: Open-weight dense reasoning models with similar parameter scales and long contexts
Model Markets Rankings
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
| Ranking | Qwen3.8-27B | Granite 4.2 30B |
|---|---|---|
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #16 of 36$0.086 per LiveBench case | UnrankedNot in the 36-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
| Benchmark | Qwen3.8-27B | Granite 4.2 30B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,437.35100% of row best · rating · qwen3.8-27b; 95% CI [1429.71618499, 1444.98971204]; votes 6626; rank 69 | 1,362.5595% 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 above | 1 benchmark winOverall lead | 0 benchmark wins |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Qwen3.8-27B | Granite 4.2 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Qwen | IBM |
| Family | Qwen3 8 27b | Granite 4 2 |
| Model | Qwen3.8-27B | Granite 4.2 30B |
| Version | Qwen3.8-27B | Granite 4.2 30B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | Unknown | 2026-08-25 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 262K | 131K |
| Total parameters | 27.8B | 29.3B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | apache-2.0 |
| Open weights | Yes | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | Yes |
| Provider access | Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
15 comparable fields · 9 material differences · Editorially curated pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Qwen3.8 27B Capabilities
Granite 4.2 30B Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs |  DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek | cross-developer peerstext |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs | Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | family variantsimage, text |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Qwen3.8-27BQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Qwen3.8-27BQwen | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Qwen3.8 27B vs Granite 4.2 30B FAQs
Is Qwen3.8 27B or Granite 4.2 30B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 27B and Granite 4.2 30B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Qwen3.8 27B is $0.40 and Granite 4.2 30B is $0.16 per million tokens, so Granite 4.2 30B is cheaper on this metric. Qwen3.8 27B is $3.00 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, Qwen3.8 27B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Qwen3.8 27B has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3.8 27B supports 262K and Granite 4.2 30B supports 131K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 27B 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 Qwen3.8 27B or Granite 4.2 30B be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Qwen3.8 27B is open weight; Granite 4.2 30B is open weight.
Can Qwen3.8 27B and Granite 4.2 30B understand images?+
Qwen3.8 27B 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, Qwen3.8 27B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Qwen3.8 27B is 131K and Granite 4.2 30B is —.
Do Qwen3.8 27B and Granite 4.2 30B support reasoning and tool use?+
Qwen3.8 27B: 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, Qwen3.8 27B or Granite 4.2 30B?+
Qwen3.8 27B has 3 sourced provider routes; Granite 4.2 30B has 1, so Qwen3.8 27B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 27B 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.