Skip to main content
Radar

Keep up with the models you depend on. Follow price changes, retirements, and API updates.Follow the models you depend on.

Follow model changes
DeepSeek logo
Model A
DeepSeek V3

DeepSeek

41.49/100

Supported · Public rank #179

90% interval 23.060.0

DeepSeek V3 vs Granite 4.2 30B

Updated September 10, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

IBM logo
Model B
Granite 4.2 30B

IBM

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Decision reading

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.

3 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

No workload recommendation clears the current evidence threshold.

Use the matched evidence, workload costs, and sourced specifications below instead of treating a point score as a universal answer.

Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Granite 4.2 30B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    Granite 4.2 30B is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    Confidence: limited

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. DeepSeek V3 does not fit this workload in one request. Granite 4.2 30B does not fit this workload in one request. Granite 4.2 30B has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
3
DeepSeek V3 only
3
Granite 4.2 30B only
11
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Not comparable
DeepSeek V3
36.7
Estimated · #130/152
Granite 4.2 30B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
DeepSeek V3
39.3
Estimated · #118/151
Granite 4.2 30B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
DeepSeek V3
41.2
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Granite 4.2 30B
54.7
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
DeepSeek V3
39.3
Estimated · #137/183
Granite 4.2 30B
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 2 vs 2 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
DeepSeek V3
26.2
Unranked · 1 rankable row
Granite 4.2 30B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
DeepSeek V3
Not ranked
Granite 4.2 30B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
DeepSeek V3
Not ranked
Granite 4.2 30B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
DeepSeek V3
39.9
#104/123
Granite 4.2 30B
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

DeepSeek V3
$0.00082
Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 30B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 30B has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

DeepSeek V3
$0.0168
Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 30B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 30B has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

DeepSeek V3
$0.0304
Does not fit in one request
Granite 4.2 30B
Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
Does not fit in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

DeepSeek V3 does not fit this workload in one request. Granite 4.2 30B does not fit this workload in one request. Granite 4.2 30B has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

DeepSeek V3

$0.07 per 1M cached input tokens

Granite 4.2 30B

No comparable hosted API rate

IBM Granite 4.2 30B model card

Documented inputs

DeepSeek V3

Not sourced

Granite 4.2 30B

Not sourced

Documented outputs

DeepSeek V3

Not sourced

Granite 4.2 30B

Not sourced

Provider availability

DeepSeek V3

Not sourced

Granite 4.2 30B

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

DeepSeek V3

Non-Reasoning

Granite 4.2 30B

Reasoning

Weight access

DeepSeek V3

Open Weight

Granite 4.2 30B

Open Weight

License

DeepSeek V3

Open Weight

Granite 4.2 30B

Open Weight

Release date

DeepSeek V3

2024-12-26

Granite 4.2 30B

2026-08-25

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 128K.

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Self-host vs API cost

Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.

DeepSeek V3
API / mo$1,028
Self-host / mo$18,221
Break-even1.2B/day
Granite 4.2 30B
API / mo$0
Self-host / moNot listed
Break-even
Proprietary model — self-hosting not applicable.
Model the full break-even

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence17 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B29.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • τ³-bench results

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B62.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BFCL v4

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B61.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • LiveCodeBench

    DeepSeek V337.6%
    Source
    Granite 4.2 30B

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Verified

    DeepSeek V342%
    Source
    Granite 4.2 30B57%
    Source

    Granite 4.2 30B leads this result

  • SWE Multilingual

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B41.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B33.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B29.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench v6

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B75.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SciCode

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B38.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    DeepSeek V359.1%
    Source
    Granite 4.2 30B66.4%
    Source

    Granite 4.2 30B leads this result

  • MMLU-Pro

    DeepSeek V375.9%
    Source
    Granite 4.2 30B77.6%
    Source

    Granite 4.2 30B leads this result

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    DeepSeek V31.724%
    Source
    Granite 4.2 30B

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME 2025

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B89.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2025

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B89.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFEval

    DeepSeek V386.1%
    Source
    Granite 4.2 30B

    Not directly comparable

  • IFBench

    DeepSeek V3
    Granite 4.2 30B77.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, DeepSeek V3 or Granite 4.2 30B?

At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V3 or Granite 4.2 30B?

Granite 4.2 30B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V3 or Granite 4.2 30B?

Granite 4.2 30B is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, DeepSeek V3 or Granite 4.2 30B?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, DeepSeek V3 or Granite 4.2 30B?

Both models list the same context window, 128K.

Related comparisons

Last updated September 10, 2026

Watch DeepSeek V3 vs Granite 4.2 30B

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.