Model comparison
Claude 2.1 vs Granite 4.0 H Small
Granite 4.0 H Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- The widest gap is in math, where Granite 4.0 H Small leads 29.3 to 9.6.
- Granite 4.0 H Small has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | IBM |
| Noometry Index | 24.9 | 35.9 |
| Released | 2023-11-21 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 7 | 19 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Granite 4.0 H Small leads
Claude 2.1: 25.8 (#322), Granite 4.0 H Small: 35.8 (#207)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 7.1% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1247 |
Reasoning Granite 4.0 H Small leads
Claude 2.1: 20.6 (#216), Granite 4.0 H Small: 23.4 (#164)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1240 |
| DTBench | 51% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 119.22 | — |
| ForecastBench | 54.2 | — |
Math Granite 4.0 H Small leads
Claude 2.1: 9.6 (#309), Granite 4.0 H Small: 29.3 (#219)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.9% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 29.6% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1251 |
Knowledge Granite 4.0 H Small leads
Claude 2.1: 15.5 (#287), Granite 4.0 H Small: 31.5 (#210)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 33% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 56.9% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 5.2% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 38.3% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1244 |
| MMLU | 73.5% | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Granite 4.0 H Small: 38.7 (#223)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1216 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1250 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1198 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1258 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Granite 4.0 H Small: 68.9 (#178)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | — | 89% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1221 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Granite 4.0 H Small: 37.6 (#209)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1240 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude 2.1: —, Granite 4.0 H Small: 44.0 (#222)
| Benchmark | Claude 2.1 | Granite 4.0 H Small |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1241 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1210 |
| WildBench | — | 73.9% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1243 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude 2.1 better than Granite 4.0 H Small?
Granite 4.0 H Small is the stronger model overall, scoring 35.9 to 24.9 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude 2.1 or Granite 4.0 H Small better for coding?
Granite 4.0 H Small scores higher on coding benchmarks: 35.8 versus 25.8 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude 2.1 and Granite 4.0 H Small share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude 2.1 has 7 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.0 H Small has 19.