The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

IBM Granite 4.2 30B vs Mercury 3

Mercury 3 leads the LLM Stats Score 36.1 to 23.3. Mercury 3 is 1.7x cheaper per token.

IBM · Inception · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Mercury 3 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 36.1 to 23.3, ranking #98 overall.

The models split the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models evenly.

On price, Mercury 3 is roughly 1.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Mercury 3 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose IBM Granite 4.2 30B

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Mercury 3

  • overall performance matters — it scores 36.1 and ranks #98 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 1.7x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Core performance indexes
23.3
#197
36.1
#98
21.0
#204
34.8
#103
8.3
#202
21.5
#105
7.4
#159
19.4
#84
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 2
1 of 2
Input price
$0.16 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$0.65 / M
$0.35 / M
Context window
131,072
1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
IBM Granite 4.2 30B
Mercury 3
14.0#56
23.0#18
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

18 reported for IBM Granite 4.2 30B · 12 for Mercury 3

2 shared

IBM Granite 4.2 30B outperforms in 1 benchmarks (IFBench), while Mercury 3 is better at 1 benchmark (GPQA).

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Mercury 3 costs less

For input processing, IBM Granite 4.2 30B ($0.16/1M tokens) is 1.6x more expensive than Mercury 3 ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, IBM Granite 4.2 30B ($0.65/1M tokens) is 1.9x more expensive than Mercury 3 ($0.35/1M tokens).

In conclusion, IBM Granite 4.2 30B is more expensive than Mercury 3.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com
IBM
IBM Granite 4.2 30B
Input tokens$0.16
Output tokens$0.65
Best providerDeepinfra
Inception
Mercury 3
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.35
Best providerInception
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Mercury 3 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to IBM Granite 4.2 30B's 131,072 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 131,072 tokens.

IBM
IBM Granite 4.2 30B
Input131,072 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Inception
Mercury 3
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

License

Usage and distribution terms

IBM Granite 4.2 30B is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Mercury 3 uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

IBM Granite 4.2 30B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Mercury 3

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

IBM Granite 4.2 30B was released on 2026-08-25, while Mercury 3 was released on 2026-10-19.

Mercury 3 is 2 months newer than IBM Granite 4.2 30B.

IBM Granite 4.2 30B

Aug 25, 2026

1 months ago

Mercury 3

Oct 19, 2026

0 days ago

1mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

IBM Granite 4.2 30B is available from DeepInfra. Mercury 3 is available from Inception.

IBM Granite 4.2 30B

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.16/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.65/1M

Mercury 3

inception logo
Inception
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.35/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against IBM Granite 4.2 30B and Mercury 3 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

IBM Granite 4.2 30B
✓ Preferred
Mercury 3
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about IBM Granite 4.2 30B vs Mercury 3.

Which is better, IBM Granite 4.2 30B or Mercury 3?

Mercury 3 leads the LLM Stats Score 36.1 to 23.3. IBM Granite 4.2 30B is made by IBM and Mercury 3 is made by Inception. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does IBM Granite 4.2 30B compare to Mercury 3 in benchmarks?

IBM Granite 4.2 30B scores RULER 64k: 90.0%, AIME 2025: 89.2%, HMMT25: 89.2%, RULER 128k: 81.4%, MMLU-Pro: 77.6%. Mercury 3 scores GPQA: 89.2%, AA-LCR: 77.7%, IFBench: 76.8%, MRCR v2: 75.5%, DeepSearchQA: 71.3%.

Is IBM Granite 4.2 30B cheaper than Mercury 3?

Mercury 3 is 1.6x cheaper for input tokens. IBM Granite 4.2 30B costs $0.16/M input and $0.65/M output via deepinfra. Mercury 3 costs $0.10/M input and $0.35/M output via inception.

What are the context window sizes for IBM Granite 4.2 30B and Mercury 3?

IBM Granite 4.2 30B supports 131K tokens and Mercury 3 supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between IBM Granite 4.2 30B and Mercury 3?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (23.3 vs 36.1), context window (131K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.16 vs $0.10/M), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes IBM Granite 4.2 30B and Mercury 3?

IBM Granite 4.2 30B is developed by IBM and Mercury 3 is developed by Inception.