Model comparison

Granite 4.2 8B vs Step 3.5 Flash

Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 40.0 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Granite 4.2 8B IBM

40.0

Rank #143 Confirmed

Step 3.5 Flash StepFun

41.7

Rank #116 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 4.2 8B scores higher in 1 category and Step 3.5 Flash in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Step 3.5 Flash leads 59.0 to 49.8.
  • Granite 4.2 8B is cheaper at $0.06 / $0.25 per million input/output tokens, against $0.10 / $0.30 for Step 3.5 Flash.
  • Step 3.5 Flash accepts more context: 256K tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Granite 4.2 8B and Step 3.5 Flash specifications
Granite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
ProviderIBMStepFun
Noometry Index40.041.7
Released—2026-01-29
WeightsOpenOpen
Context window131K256K
Max output118K256K
Input $ / M tokens$0.06$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$0.25$0.30
Results tracked1119

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Step 3.5 Flash leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 39.9 (#138), Step 3.5 Flash: 41.7 (#106)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Coding13791436

Reasoning Granite 4.2 8B leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 25.5 (#130), Step 3.5 Flash: 21.2 (#202)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Hard Prompts13271411
NYT Connections (extended)—28.4%

Math Not comparable

Granite 4.2 8B: —, Step 3.5 Flash: 40.6 (#77)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—66.8%
LMArena Math—1408

Knowledge Step 3.5 Flash leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 37.7 (#144), Step 3.5 Flash: 39.0 (#127)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Expert13801422

Multilingual Step 3.5 Flash leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 44.5 (#173), Step 3.5 Flash: 50.7 (#115)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Non-English12991386
LMArena Chinese13611448
LMArena Russian12831385
LMArena French—1421
LMArena German—1404
LMArena Japanese—1353
LMArena Korean—1350
LMArena Spanish—1419

Instruction Following Step 3.5 Flash leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 68.7 (#183), Step 3.5 Flash: 73.3 (#119)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following12981385

Long Context Step 3.5 Flash leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 40.2 (#154), Step 3.5 Flash: 42.8 (#112)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Longer Query13231402

Writing & Preference Step 3.5 Flash leads

Granite 4.2 8B: 49.8 (#183), Step 3.5 Flash: 59.0 (#108)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BStep 3.5 Flash
LMArena Text13191403
LMArena Creative Writing12381357
LMArena Multi-Turn12991405

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 4.2 8B better than Step 3.5 Flash?

Step 3.5 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.7 to 40.0 on the Noometry Index.

Which is cheaper, Granite 4.2 8B or Step 3.5 Flash?

Granite 4.2 8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.06 per million input tokens and $0.25 per million output tokens; Step 3.5 Flash lists at $0.10 and $0.30.

Is Granite 4.2 8B or Step 3.5 Flash better for coding?

Step 3.5 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.7 versus 39.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Step 3.5 Flash does, with 256K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Granite 4.2 8B and Step 3.5 Flash share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 4.2 8B has 11 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.5 Flash has 19.

Related comparisons

Go deeper