Model comparison
Granite 4.0 Micro vs o3
o3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.0 Micro costs 86× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 8 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 8 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.0 Micro scores higher in 0 categories and o3 in 5 categories; 5 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where o3 leads 54.6 to 9.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 2.8% for Granite 4.0 Micro and 84.4% for o3.
- Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper at $0.017 / $0.11 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $8 for o3.
- o3 accepts more context: 200K tokens versus 131K.
- Granite 4.0 Micro has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | IBM | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 29.0 | 47.5 |
| Released | 2025-10-02 | 2025-04-16 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 131K | 200K |
| Max output | 118K | 100K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.017 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.11 | $8 |
| Results tracked | 8 | 63 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, o3: 46.8 (#64)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 62.3% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 58.4% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 81.3% |
| GSO | — | 8.8% |
| WeirdML | — | 52.4% |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1408 |
| CadEval | — | 74% |
| ALE-Bench | — | 933.55 |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, o3: 34.5 (#44)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 63% |
| GDPval | — | 30.8% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 45.2% |
| OSWorld | — | 23% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1144 |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 65.4% |
Reasoning o3 leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 19.2 (#265), o3: 32.0 (#78)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | 38% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 6.5% |
| SimpleBench | — | 53.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 67.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 60.8% |
| CritPt | — | 1.4% |
| EnigmaEval | — | 13.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1402 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 29% |
| DTBench | — | 84.8% |
| LMCA | — | 39.7% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 146.86 |
| ForecastBench | — | 62.5 |
Math o3 leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 12.0 (#307), o3: 50.2 (#58)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 2.8% | 84.4% |
| Omni-MATH | 20.9% | 71.4% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 33.3% |
| LMArena Math | — | 1426 |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 97.8% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 18.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 2.1% |
Knowledge o3 leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 9.9 (#304), o3: 54.6 (#52)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 28.3% | 81.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 39.5% | 85.9% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 30.7% | 75.3% |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 20.3% |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 49.4% |
| Confabulations | — | 14.4% |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1402 |
Multimodal Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, o3: 41.4 (#36)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1214 |
| GeoBench | — | 74% |
| VPCT | — | 52% |
Multilingual Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, o3: 51.7 (#105)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1401 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1437 |
| LMArena French | — | 1430 |
| LMArena German | — | 1420 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1403 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1370 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1406 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1395 |
Instruction Following o3 leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 69.9 (#169), o3: 72.8 (#127)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 84.9% | 86.9% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1368 |
Long Context Not comparable
Granite 4.0 Micro: —, o3: 53.3 (#6)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 88.9% |
| CL-bench | — | 17.8% |
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1372 |
Writing & Preference o3 leads
Granite 4.0 Micro: 46.7 (#216), o3: 63.5 (#64)
| Benchmark | Granite 4.0 Micro | o3 |
|---|---|---|
| WildBench | 67% | 86.1% |
| LMArena Text | — | 1410 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1359 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 83.9% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1676 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1405 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Granite 4.0 Micro better than o3?
o3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 47.5 to 29.0 on the Noometry Index. Granite 4.0 Micro costs 86× less per token, which makes it the better buy when o3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Granite 4.0 Micro or o3?
Granite 4.0 Micro is cheaper. It lists at $0.017 per million input tokens and $0.11 per million output tokens; o3 lists at $2 and $8.
Which has the bigger context window?
o3 does, with 200K tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks do Granite 4.0 Micro and o3 share?
8 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.0 Micro has 8 scored results on Noometry and o3 has 63.