ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Granite-4.0-H-Micro vs Sarvam 105B

Too close to call on our weighted score (Granite-4.0-H-Micro 65, Sarvam 105B 65). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. IBM

    Granite-4.0-H-Micro

    Released Oct 2, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.017 / $0.112
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Granite-4.0-H-Micro

  2. Sarvam AI

    Sarvam 105B

    Released Sep 1, 2025

    65/100
    • ECI—
    • Price$0.047 / $0.186
    • Context131K
    Full specs Remove Sarvam 105B

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Granite-4.0-H-Micro 65/100, Sarvam 105B 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Granite-4.0-H-Micro 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-MicroGranite-4.0-H-Micro $0.041 · Sarvam 105B $0.082 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameGranite-4.0-H-Micro 131,072 · Sarvam 105B 131,072 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsGranite-4.0-H-Micro: Text · Sarvam 105B: Text
  • Self-hostingAll open weightsEvery model here can be downloaded and run on your own hardware
How the score is built
MeasureWeightGranite-4.0-H-MicroSarvam 105B
Price50%100100
Inputs & features30%3535
Context window20%2424
Overall100%65/10065/100

Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.

02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Granite-4.0-H-Micro vs Sarvam 105B specifications side by side
SpecificationGranite-4.0-H-MicroIBMSarvam 105BSarvam AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)——
ECI rank——
Price per million tokens
Input$0.017 (best)$0.047
Output$0.112 (best)$0.186
Cached input——
Blended (3:1)$0.041 (best)$0.082
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 1 providersMedian of 2 providers
Limits
Context window131,072 tokens131,072 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesNoNo
PDFsNoNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoNo
ReasoningNoYes · low · medium · high
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesNo
Availability
WeightsOpenOpen
API model ID—sarvam-105b
API providers13 (best)
ReleasedOct 2, 2025Sep 1, 2025
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

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
  • Sarvam 105B$0.842
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Granite-4.0-H-Micro or Sarvam 105B?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Granite-4.0-H-Micro 65/100, Sarvam 105B 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Granite-4.0-H-Micro 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, Granite-4.0-H-Micro or Sarvam 105B?

Granite-4.0-H-Micro is cheaper at $0.017 input / $0.112 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). Sarvam 105B costs $0.047 input / $0.186 output per million tokens (median across 2 API providers). 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 $0.082 for Sarvam 105B (2× 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 Sarvam 105B 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 Sarvam 105B 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?

Granite-4.0-H-Micro and Sarvam 105B share the same 131,072-token context window. Maximum output per response: Granite-4.0-H-Micro up to 131,072, Sarvam 105B up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Granite-4.0-H-Micro accepts text; Sarvam 105B accepts text. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Yes, both publish their weights, so you can self-host them.

Which is newer?

Granite-4.0-H-Micro is the newest, released Oct 2, 2025. Sarvam 105B came out Sep 1, 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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons