Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.3-Codex vs Granite 4.2 8B

GPT-5.3-Codex leads Granite 4.2 8B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 32.5 to 11.1, and Granite 4.2 8B costs 70.0x less per output token ($0.20 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.3-CodexOpenAI
Coding
60.0
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$14.00
4
Granite 4.2 8BIBM Granite
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
0
vs boards won of 4 shared

GPT-5.3-Codex or Granite 4.2 8B: which to pick

Only GPT-5.3-Codex has a coding score, 60.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Granite 4.2 8B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Granite 4.2 8B for output tokens 70.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $14.00 per million).

Shared results
4
GPT-5.3-Codex only
30
Granite 4.2 8B only
23
Like-for-like categories
3 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.3-Codex 60.0 from 3 benchmarks, Granite 4.2 8B not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 38.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): GPT-5.3-Codex 83.3% against Granite 4.2 8B 45.0%, 38.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.3-Codex $14.00 against Granite 4.2 8B $0.20 per million output tokens, 70.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.3-Codex takes 400K tokens, Granite 4.2 8B 131K.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-5.3-CodexBarsGranite 4.2 8BTies
Intelligence10
Reasoning20
General10
All shared boards40
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index16 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
LMArena WebDev1407Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
AA Coding IndexNot measured22.4Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)87.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)78.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)61.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
IOI (Vals AI)53.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
SciCodeNot measured31.5%Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)53.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Terminal-Bench78.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
WeirdML79.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
ALE-Bench1655.2Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LMArena Text: codingNot measured1378Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: software and ITNot measured1367Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena WebDev: React1395Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1422Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
LMArena WebDev: from an image1443Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
AA Intelligence Index32.511.1GPT-5.3-Codex
Epoch Capabilities Index157.1Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured1.3Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1032Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps983Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1053Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1084Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1124Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
τ²-Bench Telecom86.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
METR time horizons74.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Vending-Bench 2$5,940Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 32 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)91.5%63.1%GPT-5.3-Codex
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)42.5%9.7%GPT-5.3-Codex
LMArena Text: hard promptsNot measured1327Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: expertNot measured1386Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in EnglishNot measured1345Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here
MathNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
Neither model has a result on 13 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
LMArena Text: scienceNot measured1336Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcareNot measured1336Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: legal and governmentNot measured1327Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: business and financeNot measured1322Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
Design Arena: websites1162Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: UI components1134Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: game dev1161Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: data viz1164Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: 3D1007Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: all code categories1144Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: SVG1129Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1152Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
General benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
IFBench75.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.3-Codex measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)83.3%45.0%GPT-5.3-Codex
LMArena TextNot measured1319Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: instruction followingNot measured1300Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: creative writingNot measured1236Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: EnglishNot measured1337Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: non-EnglishNot measured1301Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: ChineseNot measured1367Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: RussianNot measured1282Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turnNot measured1301Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: longer queriesNot measured1325Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: writing and languageNot measured1269Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and mediaNot measured1271Only Granite 4.2 8B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 33 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
BenchmarkGPT-5.3-CodexGranite 4.2 8BLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5.3-Codex$0.0088Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B$0.0002Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.3-Codex$0.130Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B$0.0046Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.3-Codex$0.490Fits in one request
Granite 4.2 8B$0.018Exceeds the context window

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-5.3-Codex and Granite 4.2 8B
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.3-CodexIBM Granite 4.2 8B
MakerOpenAIIBM Granite
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedFebruary 24, 2026August 31, 2026
Context window400K131K
Input $/Mtok$1.75$0.08
Output $/Mtok$14.00$0.20
Coding index60.0Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved task$0.59Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.3-Codex better than Granite 4.2 8B for coding?

Only GPT-5.3-Codex has a coding score, 60.0 on the Vibe Coding Index; Granite 4.2 8B has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Granite 4.2 8B for output tokens 70.0x cheaper ($0.20 vs $14.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.3-Codex or Granite 4.2 8B?

GPT-5.3-Codex costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Granite 4.2 8B costs $0.08 and $0.20. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.3-Codex only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.3-Codex or Granite 4.2 8B?

GPT-5.3-Codex, with 400K tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.3-Codex vs Granite 4.2 8B comparison based on?

4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.3-Codex's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Granite 4.2 8B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next