Model comparison
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Granite 4.2 30b
Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.8 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Granite 4.2 30b in 7 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Granite 4.2 30b leads 53.8 to 34.1.
Side by side
| Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | IBM |
| Noometry Index | 33.2 | 41.8 |
| Released | — | — |
| Weights | Open | Open |
| Context window | — | — |
| Max output | — | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | — | — |
| Results tracked | 12 | 11 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), Granite 4.2 30b: 41.0 (#126)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1149 | 1396 |
Reasoning Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Granite 4.2 30b: 27.8 (#112)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1138 | 1374 |
Math Not comparable
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Granite 4.2 30b: —
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1159 | — |
Knowledge Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Granite 4.2 30b: 39.1 (#138)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1131 | 1406 |
Multilingual Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Granite 4.2 30b: 47.3 (#151)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1068 | 1340 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1139 | 1414 |
| LMArena Russian | 1063 | 1343 |
Instruction Following Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Granite 4.2 30b: 71.2 (#155)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1116 | 1347 |
Long Context Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Granite 4.2 30b: 41.4 (#140)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1155 | 1359 |
Writing & Preference Granite 4.2 30b leads
Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Granite 4.2 30b: 53.8 (#156)
| Benchmark | Granite 3.1 2b Instruct | Granite 4.2 30b |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1127 | 1361 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1116 | 1288 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1099 | 1339 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Granite 4.2 30b?
Granite 4.2 30b is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.8 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.
Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Granite 4.2 30b better for coding?
Granite 4.2 30b scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.0 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Granite 4.2 30b share?
11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Granite 4.2 30b has 11.