Granite-4.0-H-Micro vs Qwen Flash
Too close to call on our weighted score (Qwen Flash 68, Granite-4.0-H-Micro 65). The right pick depends on what you value most.
IBMGranite-4.0-H-Micro
65/100- ECI—
- Price$0.017 / $0.112
- Context131K
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen Flash
68/100- ECI—
- Price$0.05 / $0.40
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen Flash 68/100, Granite-4.0-H-Micro 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Granite-4.0-H-Micro on price and Qwen Flash for long inputs. 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-MicroGranite-4.0-H-Micro $0.041 · Qwen Flash $0.138 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextQwen FlashQwen Flash 1,000,000 · Granite-4.0-H-Micro 131,072 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsGranite-4.0-H-Micro: Text · Qwen Flash: Text
- Self-hostingGranite-4.0-H-MicroPublishes downloadable weights
| Measure | Weight | Granite-4.0-H-Micro | Qwen Flash |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 100 | 91 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 35 | 35 |
| Context window | 20% | 24 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 68/100 |
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 | Granite-4.0-H-MicroIBM | Qwen FlashAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.017 (best) | $0.05 |
| Output | $0.112 (best) | $0.40 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.041 (best) | $0.138 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 1 providers | Official Alibaba API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 131,072 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 32,768 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | No |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | qwen-flash |
| API providers | 1 | 6 (best) |
| Released | Oct 2, 2025 | Jul 28, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | 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.
- Granite-4.0-H-Micro$0.394
- Qwen Flash$1.30
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Granite-4.0-H-Micro or Qwen Flash?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 2 points (Qwen Flash 68/100, Granite-4.0-H-Micro 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Granite-4.0-H-Micro on price and Qwen Flash for long inputs. 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, Granite-4.0-H-Micro or Qwen Flash?
Granite-4.0-H-Micro is cheaper at $0.017 input / $0.112 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 $0.041 per million tokens for Granite-4.0-H-Micro versus $0.138 for Qwen Flash (3.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Granite-4.0-H-Micro has not been scored yet and Qwen Flash has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Granite-4.0-H-Micro and Qwen Flash yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both 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-Micro. Maximum output per response: Granite-4.0-H-Micro up to 131,072, Qwen Flash up to 32,768 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Granite-4.0-H-Micro accepts text; Qwen Flash accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Granite-4.0-H-Micro publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Qwen Flash is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Granite-4.0-H-Micro is the newest, released Oct 2, 2025. Qwen Flash came out Jul 28, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: 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.
Related comparisons
- Add Voxtral Mini 3B 2507Three-way comparison
- Granite-4.0-H-Micro vs Voxtral Mini 3B 2507Mistral AI
- Granite-4.0-H-Micro vs Sarvam 30BSarvam AI
- Granite-4.0-H-Micro vs Seed 1.6 FlashByteDance Seed
- Granite-4.0-H-Micro vs Trinity MiniArcee AI
- Qwen Flash vs Voxtral Small 24B 2507Mistral AI
- Qwen Flash vs Apertus 8BSwiss AI
