Apertus 8B vs Qwen Flash vs Granite-4.0-H-Small
Qwen Flash comes out ahead, 68 to 63 and 56 on our weighted score, though Granite-4.0-H-Small is 17% cheaper per token.
Swiss AI
Apertus 8B
56/100- ECI—
- Price$0.10 / $0.20
- Context66K
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Flash
68/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.40
- Context1M
IBMGranite-4.0-H-Small
63/100- ECI—
- Price$0.064 / $0.265
- Context131K
Qwen Flash is our pick
Qwen Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Granite-4.0-H-Small (63) and Apertus 8B (56). It leads on context window. Granite-4.0-H-Small wins 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 priceGranite-4.0-H-SmallGranite-4.0-H-Small $0.114 · Apertus 8B $0.125 · Qwen Flash $0.138 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen FlashQwen Flash 1,000,000 · Granite-4.0-H-Small 131,072 · Apertus 8B 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsApertus 8B: Text · Qwen Flash: Text · Granite-4.0-H-Small: Text
- Self-hostingApertus 8B and Granite-4.0-H-SmallPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 8B | Qwen Flash | Granite-4.0-H-Small |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 93 | 91 | 95 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 60 | 24 |
| Overall | 100% | 56/100 | 68/100 | 63/100 |
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 | Qwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen) | Granite-4.0-H-SmallIBM |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.10 | $0.05 (best) | $0.064 |
| Output | $0.20 (best) | $0.40 | $0.265 |
| Cached input | — | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.125 | $0.138 | $0.114 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Alibaba API | Official watsonx.ai API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 131,072 tokens |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 32,768 tokens | 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 | Yes | No |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No | Yes |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Proprietary | Open |
| API model ID | — | qwen-flash | ibm/granite-4-h-small |
| API providers | 1 | 6 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 | Oct 2, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2025 | Apr 2024 | — |
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
- Qwen Flash$1.30
- Granite-4.0-H-Small$1.17
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 8B, Qwen Flash or Granite-4.0-H-Small?
Qwen Flash is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Granite-4.0-H-Small (63) and Apertus 8B (56). It leads on context window. Granite-4.0-H-Small wins 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, Qwen Flash or Granite-4.0-H-Small?
Granite-4.0-H-Small is cheaper at $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); Qwen Flash costs $0.05 input / $0.40 output per million tokens (official Alibaba API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.114 per million tokens for Granite-4.0-H-Small versus $0.125 for Apertus 8B (1.1× as much) and $0.138 for Qwen Flash (1.2× 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, Qwen Flash has not been scored yet and Granite-4.0-H-Small has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 8B, Qwen Flash and Granite-4.0-H-Small 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?
Qwen Flash has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 131,072 for Granite-4.0-H-Small and 65,536 for Apertus 8B. Maximum output per response: Apertus 8B up to 8,192, Qwen Flash up to 32,768, Granite-4.0-H-Small up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 8B accepts text; Qwen Flash accepts text; Granite-4.0-H-Small accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Apertus 8B and Granite-4.0-H-Small publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Qwen Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Granite-4.0-H-Small is the newest, released Oct 2, 2025. Apertus 8B came out Sep 2, 2025; Qwen Flash came out Jul 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 8B Sep 2025, Qwen Flash Apr 2024.
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 Oct 4, 2026.
