Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.
| Metric | Granite 4.2 30B | Llama 4 Scout |
|---|---|---|
| Input ($/M tokens) | $0.16 | $0.18 |
| Output ($/M tokens) | $0.65 | $0.66 |
Verdict. Granite 4.2 30B wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.
Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Granite 4.2 30B is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Granite 4.2 30B makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.
Strengths. Granite 4.2 30B is strongest on Coding Index (29.9), Intelligence Index (23.7). Llama 4 Scout leads on Intelligence Index (10.3), Coding Index (8.2).
Speed. Throughput is comparable — 76 tok/s vs 94 tok/s — so generation speed shouldn't drive your choice here. Look at the per-benchmark wins instead.
Provider. IBM and Meta sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: IBM tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while Meta often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.
Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): Granite 4.2 30B costs $14.55 ($175/year); Llama 4 Scout costs $15.30 ($184/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): Granite 4.2 30B ≈ $2.10/run, Llama 4 Scout ≈ $2.22/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): Granite 4.2 30B ≈ $97/run, Llama 4 Scout ≈ $102/run. Granite 4.2 30B becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.
Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.
Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks
Granite 4.2 30B is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.28/M tokens vs $0.30/M for Llama 4 Scout.
Granite 4.2 30B wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Llama 4 Scout. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.
Llama 4 Scout generates tokens faster at 94 tok/s vs 76 tok/s. Granite 4.2 30B also has lower time-to-first-token (0.81s vs 0.82s).
Choose based on your priorities: Granite 4.2 30B for lower cost, Granite 4.2 30B for stronger benchmark performance, and Llama 4 Scout for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.