Coding work
Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks
Not enough matched evidence
Qwen3.5 397B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Confidence: limited
Granite 4.2 8B vs Qwen3.5 397B
Updated October 15, 2026. Rank says Qwen3.5 397B is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Both of these models will change. Get the price, version and retirement notices for the pair, each with its source. Follow model changes
Share or export
Decision reading
Qwen3.5 397B has the higher public point estimate, 55.45 versus 33.4. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 9 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
- Shared results
- 9
- Granite 4.2 8B only
- 5
- Qwen3.5 397B only
- 53
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 / 8
Estimated: Granite 4.2 8B and Qwen3.5 397B. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How the comparison works
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
Agentic work
Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion
Not enough matched evidence
Granite 4.2 8B and Qwen3.5 397B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.
Confidence: limitedLong documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
No clear pick
The documented context windows are equal.
Confidence: documentedChat 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-ratesCache-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. Granite 4.2 8B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Granite 4.2 8B has no comparable published API token rate.
Confidence: rate-fallbackRepository 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
Which one for a specific job
Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.
The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.
17.2Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B
Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8
The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
Same basis rules as the category table below
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
5 Granite 4.2 8B only
9 Shared
53 Qwen3.5 397B only
2 categories rest on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.
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.
SWE MultilingualCoding
Normalized gap 38.5Granite 4.2 8B:30.8%Qwen3.5 397B:69.3%SWE-bench ProCoding
Normalized gap 31.8Granite 4.2 8B:19.1%Qwen3.5 397B:50.9%SWE-bench VerifiedCoding
Normalized gap 28.5Granite 4.2 8B:47.7%Qwen3.5 397B:76.2%GPQAKnowledge
Normalized gap 24.3Granite 4.2 8B:64.1%Qwen3.5 397B:88.4%MMLU-ProKnowledge
Normalized gap 13.8Granite 4.2 8B:74.0%Qwen3.5 397B:87.8%
Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 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.
Instruction following
Like-for-like- Granite 4.2 8B
- 86.5
- #41/146
- Qwen3.5 397B
- 79.9
- #57/146
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Granite 4.2 8B leads
Agentic
Directional only- Granite 4.2 8B
- 15.7
- Estimated · #113/127
- Qwen3.5 397B
- 44.2
- Estimated · #60/127
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 3 vs 14 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Knowledge
Directional only- Granite 4.2 8B
- 30.6
- Supported · #154/184
- Qwen3.5 397B
- 53.2
- Estimated · #68/184
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 2 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Directional only
Coding
Not comparable- Granite 4.2 8B
- 17.2
- Estimated · #125/150
- Qwen3.5 397B
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 6 vs 6 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Granite 4.2 8B
- 56.8
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Qwen3.5 397B
- 74.9
- Unranked · 2 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Granite 4.2 8B
- Not ranked
- Qwen3.5 397B
- 73.6
- #29/54
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Granite 4.2 8B
- Not ranked
- Qwen3.5 397B
- 93.8
- #5/17
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Granite 4.2 8B
- Not ranked
- Qwen3.5 397B
- 81.7
- Unranked · 5 rankable rows
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Granite 4.2 8B | Qwen3.5 397B | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Instruction following | 86.5#41/146 | 79.9#57/146 | Like-for-likeProvisional lane · 1 vs 1 weighted rows | Granite 4.2 8B leads |
| Agentic | 15.7Estimated · #113/127 | 44.2Estimated · #60/127 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 3 vs 14 public rows | Directional only |
| Knowledge | 30.6Supported · #154/184 | 53.2Estimated · #68/184 | Directional onlyBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 2 vs 6 public rows | Directional only |
| Coding | 17.2Estimated · #125/150 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.8 lane · 6 vs 6 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | 56.8Unranked · 2 rankable rows | 74.9Unranked · 2 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not ranked | 73.6#29/54 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | 93.8#5/17 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 1 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | 81.7Unranked · 5 rankable rows | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 2 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.8) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology
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
- Granite 4.2 8B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Qwen3.5 397B
- $0.0024
- Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B has no comparable published API token rate.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Granite 4.2 8B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Fits in one request
- Qwen3.5 397B
- $0.0408
- Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B has no comparable published API token rate.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Granite 4.2 8B
- Self-hosted; infrastructure cost varies
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached-input rate unavailable
- Qwen3.5 397B
- $0.168
- Does not fit in one request
- Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Granite 4.2 8B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B does not fit this workload in one request. Qwen3.5 397B has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate. Granite 4.2 8B has no comparable published API token rate.
Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationGranite 4.2 8BQwen3.5 397B
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Granite 4.2 8B
Qwen3.5 397B
128K
API model ID
Granite 4.2 8B
ibm-granite/granite-4.2-8b
IBM Granite 4.2 8B model cardQwen3.5 397B
Not sourced
Cached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Granite 4.2 8B
No comparable hosted API rate
IBM Granite 4.2 8B model cardQwen3.5 397B
Not published
Documented inputs
Granite 4.2 8B
Not sourced
Qwen3.5 397B
Not sourced
Documented outputs
Granite 4.2 8B
Not sourced
Qwen3.5 397B
Not sourced
Provider availability
Granite 4.2 8B
Not sourced
Qwen3.5 397B
Not sourced
Reasoning profile
Granite 4.2 8B
Reasoning
Qwen3.5 397B
Non-Reasoning
Weight access
Granite 4.2 8B
Open Weight
Qwen3.5 397B
Open Weight
License
Granite 4.2 8B
Open Weight
Qwen3.5 397B
Open Weight
Release date
Granite 4.2 8B
2026-08-25
Qwen3.5 397B
2026-02-16
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
- Qwen3.5 397B has the higher public point estimate, 55.45 versus 33.4. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
- 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.
Questions
Which is better, Granite 4.2 8B or Qwen3.5 397B?
Qwen3.5 397B has the higher public point estimate, 55.45 versus 33.4. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Granite 4.2 8B or Qwen3.5 397B?
Qwen3.5 397B is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Granite 4.2 8B or Qwen3.5 397B?
Qwen3.5 397B scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 44.2 to 15.7. Granite 4.2 8B and Qwen3.5 397B are scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.
Which costs less, Granite 4.2 8B or Qwen3.5 397B?
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, Granite 4.2 8B or Qwen3.5 397B?
Both models list the same context window, 128K.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence67 rows
Agentic
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Granite 4.2 8B20.6%SourceQwen3.5 397B—Not directly comparable
τ³-bench results
Granite 4.2 8B58.1%SourceQwen3.5 397B68.4%SourceQwen3.5 397B leads this result
BFCL v4
Granite 4.2 8B52.4%SourceQwen3.5 397B—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B52.5%SourceNot directly comparable
BrowseComp
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B69%SourceNot directly comparable
OSWorld-Verified
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B62.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Claw-Eval
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B56.8%SourceNot directly comparable
QwenClawBench
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B51.8%SourceNot directly comparable
VITA-Bench
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B43.7%SourceNot directly comparable
DeepPlanning
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B37.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Toolathlon
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B36.3%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP Atlas
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B46.1%SourceNot directly comparable
MCP-Tasks
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B74.2%SourceNot directly comparable
WideResearch
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B74.0%SourceNot directly comparable
Gert Labs
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B46.76%SourceNot directly comparable
ResearchClawBench
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B14.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
SWE-bench Verified
Granite 4.2 8B47.7%SourceQwen3.5 397B76.2%SourceQwen3.5 397B leads this result
SWE-bench Pro
Granite 4.2 8B19.1%SourceQwen3.5 397B50.9%SourceQwen3.5 397B leads this result
SWE Multilingual
Granite 4.2 8B30.8%SourceQwen3.5 397B69.3%SourceQwen3.5 397B leads this result
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Granite 4.2 8B20.6%SourceQwen3.5 397B—Not directly comparable
LiveCodeBench v6
Granite 4.2 8B73.2%SourceQwen3.5 397B83.6%SourceQwen3.5 397B leads this result
SciCode
Granite 4.2 8B36.1%SourceQwen3.5 397B—Not directly comparable
NL2Repo
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B32.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B52.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Multimodal
MMMU
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B85.0%SourceNot directly comparable
MMMU-Pro
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B79%SourceNot directly comparable
RealWorldQA
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B83.9%SourceNot directly comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B90.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B87.5%SourceNot directly comparable
Video-MME (w/o subtitle)
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B83.7%SourceNot directly comparable
MathVision
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B88.6%SourceNot directly comparable
We-Math
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B87.9%SourceNot directly comparable
DynaMath
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B86.3%SourceNot directly comparable
SimpleVQA
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B67.1%SourceNot directly comparable
CharXiv
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B80.8%SourceNot directly comparable
MMLongBench-Doc
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B61.5%SourceNot directly comparable
CC-OCR
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B82.0%SourceNot directly comparable
AI2D_TEST
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B93.9%SourceNot directly comparable
CountBench
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B97.2%SourceNot directly comparable
RefCOCO (avg)
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B92.3%SourceNot directly comparable
ODINW13
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B47.0%SourceNot directly comparable
ERQA
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B67.5%SourceNot directly comparable
VideoMMMU
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B84.7%SourceNot directly comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B86.7%SourceNot directly comparable
ScreenSpot Pro
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B65.6%SourceNot directly comparable
V*
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B95.8%SourceNot directly comparable
Knowledge
GPQA
Granite 4.2 8B64.1%SourceQwen3.5 397B88.4%SourceQwen3.5 397B leads this result
MMLU-Pro
Granite 4.2 8B74.0%SourceQwen3.5 397B87.8%SourceQwen3.5 397B leads this result
SuperGPQA
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B70.4%SourceNot directly comparable
MMLU-Redux
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B94.9%SourceNot directly comparable
C-Eval
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B93%SourceNot directly comparable
HLE
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B28.7%SourceNot directly comparable
Multilingual
MMLU-ProX
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B84.7%SourceNot directly comparable
NOVA-63
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B59.1%SourceNot directly comparable
INCLUDE
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B85.6%SourceNot directly comparable
PolyMath
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B73.3%SourceNot directly comparable
MAXIFE
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B88.2%SourceNot directly comparable
Instruction following
Math
AIME 2025
Granite 4.2 8B86.7%SourceQwen3.5 397B—Not directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2025
Granite 4.2 8B78.3%SourceQwen3.5 397B94.8%SourceQwen3.5 397B leads this result
AIME26
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B93.3%SourceNot directly comparable
HMMT Nov 2025
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B92.7%SourceNot directly comparable
HMMT Feb 2026
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B87.9%SourceNot directly comparable
MMAnswerBench
Granite 4.2 8B—Qwen3.5 397B80.9%SourceNot directly comparable
67 public results · 9 shared
Watch Granite 4.2 8B vs Qwen3.5 397B
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 5,500+ readers.
Last updated October 15, 2026