Apertus 8B vs Granite-4.0-H-Small vs Trinity Mini
Trinity Mini comes out ahead, 65 to 61 and 54 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
Swiss AI
Apertus 8B
54/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.20
- Context66K
IBMGranite-4.0-H-Small
61/100- ECI—
- Price$0.064 / $0.265
- Context131K
- Our pick
Arcee AITrinity Mini
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.045 / $0.15
- Context131K
Trinity Mini is our pick
Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Granite-4.0-H-Small (61) and Apertus 8B (54). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceTrinity MiniTrinity Mini $0.071 · Granite-4.0-H-Small $0.114 · Apertus 8B $0.125 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGranite-4.0-H-Small and Trinity MiniGranite-4.0-H-Small 131,072 · Trinity Mini 131,072 · Apertus 8B 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsApertus 8B: Text · Granite-4.0-H-Small: Text · Trinity Mini: Text
- Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 8B | Granite-4.0-H-Small | Trinity Mini |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 89 | 91 | 100 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 25 | 25 |
| Overall | 100% | 54/100 | 61/100 | 65/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Apertus 8BSwiss AI | Granite-4.0-H-SmallIBM | Trinity MiniArcee AI |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.10 | $0.064 | $0.045 (best) |
| Output | $0.20 | $0.265 | $0.15 (best) |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.125 | $0.114 | $0.071 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official watsonx.ai API | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No | No |
| Audio | No | No | No |
| Video | No | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Open | OpenOpenMDW-1.1 |
| API model ID | — | ibm/granite-4-h-small | — |
| API providers | 1 | 1 | 1 |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Oct 2, 2025 | Dec 1, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2025 | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Apertus 8B$1.40
- Granite-4.0-H-Small$1.17
- Trinity Mini$0.75
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 8B, Granite-4.0-H-Small or Trinity Mini?
Trinity Mini is the better all-round choice, scoring 65/100 against Granite-4.0-H-Small (61) and Apertus 8B (54). It leads on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Apertus 8B, Granite-4.0-H-Small or Trinity Mini?
Trinity Mini is cheaper at $0.045 input / $0.15 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Granite-4.0-H-Small costs $0.064 input / $0.265 output per million tokens (official watsonx.ai API price); Apertus 8B costs $0.10 input / $0.20 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.071 per million tokens for Trinity Mini versus $0.114 for Granite-4.0-H-Small (1.6× as much) and $0.125 for Apertus 8B (1.8× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers all three models yet. Apertus 8B has not been scored yet, Granite-4.0-H-Small has not been scored yet and Trinity Mini has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 8B, Granite-4.0-H-Small and Trinity Mini yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Granite-4.0-H-Small and Trinity Mini have the largest context windows (131,072 and 131,072 tokens), against 65,536 for Apertus 8B. Maximum output per response: Apertus 8B up to 8,192, Granite-4.0-H-Small up to 131,072, Trinity Mini up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 8B accepts text; Granite-4.0-H-Small accepts text; Trinity Mini accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Yes, all three publish their weights (Apache-2.0 and OpenMDW-1.1), so you can self-host them.
Which is newer?
Trinity Mini is the newest, released Dec 1, 2025. Granite-4.0-H-Small came out Oct 2, 2025; Apertus 8B came out Sep 2, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 8B Sep 2025.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
