Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Granite 4.2 8B vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct

Granite 4.2 8B leads Llama 3.3 70B Instruct on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 11.1 to 7.7, and Granite 4.2 8B costs 3.6x less per output token ($0.20 vs $0.72 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 25 benchmarks have a result for both.

Granite 4.2 8BIBM Granite
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$0.20
24
Llama 3.3 70B InstructMeta Llama
Coding
No data
Overall
26.0
Output $/M
$0.72
1
vs boards won of 25 shared

Granite 4.2 8B or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Granite 4.2 8B for output tokens 3.6x cheaper ($0.20 vs $0.72 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: creative writing, where it leads.

Shared results
25
Granite 4.2 8B only
2
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct only
27
Like-for-like categories
5 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
Granite 4.2 8B not benchmarked, Llama 3.3 70B Instruct not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 14.9 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Granite 4.2 8B 45.0% against Llama 3.3 70B Instruct 15.7%, 29.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Granite 4.2 8B $0.20 against Llama 3.3 70B Instruct $0.72 per million output tokens, 3.6x apart.
Context window
Both take 131K tokens.

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
CategoryGranite 4.2 8BBarsLlama 3.3 70B InstructTies
Coding30
Intelligence10
Reasoning50
Knowledge40
General111
All shared boards241
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index30
Coding benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Coding Index22.411.9Granite 4.2 8B
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured28.8%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
SciCode31.5%Not measuredOnly Granite 4.2 8B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.0%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
WeirdMLNot measured14.4%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: coding13781268Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: software and IT13671273Granite 4.2 8B
Neither model has a result on the other 36 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Intelligence Index11.17.7Granite 4.2 8B
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured127.3Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Agentic Index1.3Not measuredOnly Granite 4.2 8B measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured26.6%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
BALROGNot measured23.0%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)Not measured31.9%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
Reasoning benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)63.1%49.8%Granite 4.2 8B
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)9.7%3.6%Granite 4.2 8B
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured47.4%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
SimpleBenchNot measured19.9%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13271257Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: expert13861225Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13451277Granite 4.2 8B
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
AA Math IndexNot measured7.7Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured7.7%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured5.1%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
MATH level 5Not measured41.6%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathNot measured1267Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: mathematical workNot measured1267Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured71.3%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
MMLUNot measured86.3%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: science13361284Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13361275Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: legal and government13271284Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: business and finance13221243Granite 4.2 8B
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
Neither model has a result on 9 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index111
General benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
IFBenchNot measured47.1%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)45.0%15.7%Granite 4.2 8B
DTBenchNot measured59.5%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMCANot measured17.5%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
Fiction.LiveBenchNot measured33.3%Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text13191274Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: instruction following13001242Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: creative writing12361250Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
LMArena Text: English13371303Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: non-English13011236Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: Chinese13671217Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1251Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1150Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1142Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1282Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1269Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: Russian12821252Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1259Only Llama 3.3 70B Instruct measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13011280Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: longer queries13251255Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: writing and language12691255Granite 4.2 8B
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12711241Granite 4.2 8B
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
BenchmarkGranite 4.2 8BLlama 3.3 70B InstructLeader
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

Granite 4.2 8B$0.0002Fits in one request
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.0008Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Granite 4.2 8B$0.0046Fits in one request
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.025Fits in one request

Granite 4.2 8B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Granite 4.2 8B$0.018Exceeds the context window
Llama 3.3 70B Instruct$0.097Exceeds 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 Granite 4.2 8B and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
SpecificationIBM Granite 4.2 8BMeta Llama 3.3 70B Instruct
MakerIBM GraniteMeta Llama
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedAugust 31, 2026December 6, 2024
Context window131K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.08$0.45
Output $/Mtok$0.20$0.72
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Granite 4.2 8B better than Llama 3.3 70B Instruct for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Granite 4.2 8B for output tokens 3.6x cheaper ($0.20 vs $0.72 per million) and work measured by LMArena Text: creative writing, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Granite 4.2 8B or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Granite 4.2 8B costs $0.08 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Llama 3.3 70B Instruct costs $0.45 and $0.72. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Granite 4.2 8B or Llama 3.3 70B Instruct?

Neither: both take 131K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Granite 4.2 8B vs Llama 3.3 70B Instruct comparison based on?

25 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Granite 4.2 8B's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Llama 3.3 70B Instruct's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next