Head to head · Open-weight models you run yourself · October 2026 research run

Devstral Small 2 vs Granite 4.2 3B

Devstral Small 2 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Granite 4.2 3B's 59.8 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Granite 4.2 3B leads on reach, agent interface and documentation and upkeep. Both do open-weight models you run yourself.

Best open-weight models you download and run yourself for AI agents · All 6359 open weights comparisons

Which one, for what

Devstral Small 2 C

Best for Developers who want a dependable local coding agent on one consumer GPU or a 32 GB Mac

Ahead on

  • Risk, 60 against 55

Watch for

No limitations, safety results, languages or data on the card

Granite 4.2 3B C

Best for Agents on small hardware that want a permissive reasoning model for tool calls and coding, with thinking they can switch off

Ahead on

  • Reach, 95 against 90
  • Agent interface, 85 against 65
  • Documentation and upkeep, 92 against 46

Watch for

No safety results published for 4.2, and only general safety cautions

Why the edge

Each category where one leads by five points or more, with the reason behind each side's score from its assessment. The numbers are in the table below; this is what they stand for.

Documentation and upkeep Granite 4.2 3B +46

Devstral Small 2 46

Model card 11, Intended use, the architecture, the parameters and the context are on the card. Training data 0, Nothing on the card about the training data. Last change 10, the last commit, on 15 July 2026, updated the files to match mistral-common, 118 days before this check and within 180. Responsiveness 10, Of the 23 most recent discussions that aren't pull requests (9 December 2025 to 6 November 2026), 11 have a reply from a mistralai member, which is some. Version policy 5, Devstral Small 1.1 stays in its own repository, which this card links as the predecessor, with no dated note on the older card that we read. File health 10, Config, template, tokenizer and card agree, and the June and July commits fixed stray tokens and brought the files in line with mistral-common. 11 + 0 + 10 + 10 + 5 + 10 = 46.

Granite 4.2 3B 92

The card covers everything but a knowledge cut-off (17). IBM's disclosure lists the datasets with sources and sizes (20). The index file changed on 20 October 2026, 15 days before this check, and nothing in IBM's 4.2 repositories or the GitHub repository changed since (20). The two questions asked on IBM's 3B repositories have an IBM reply, and no new thread was opened after 21 October (20). Granite 4.1 3B stays in its own repository with no note (5), and the files agree with each other (10).

Agent interface Granite 4.2 3B +20

Devstral Small 2 65

Chat template 20, chat_template.jinja in the repository (11,362 characters), with the tokenizer's tekken file for mistral-common. Tool-calling format 25, the card documents tools in the OpenAI function format with an example, names the mistral tool-call parser with auto tool choice for vLLM, shows the same for SGLang, and ships test prompts with the expected tool-call output. Trained tool calling 10, the card says the model excels at using tools, and its tests cover one tool call and calls made one at a time in sequence. Structured output 0, Nothing on the card about JSON or schema-constrained answers for this model. Reasoning control 0, no reasoning mode is documented, and a June 2026 commit removed stray thinking tokens from the files. Context 10, 256K tokens per the card, served at 262,144 in its vLLM command. 20 + 25 + 10 + 0 + 0 + 10 = 65.

Granite 4.2 3B 85

The template ships in the repository (20). The card shows how tools are declared and how calls come back, and names qwen3_coder for vLLM and SGLang (25). The template renders several calls in a turn (20). JSON output isn't documented for 4.2 (0). Thinking turns off or goes to low effort per request, with the reasoning returned apart in SGLang (10), and 131,072 tokens are native (10).

Reach Granite 4.2 3B +5

Devstral Small 2 90

Memory 25, the smallest build at 4 bits from a runtime's own library is Ollama's devstral-small-2 at Q4_K_M, 15 GB, and 15 GB × 1.2 = 18 GB, within 24 GB. Mistral's own FP8 files are 25.79 GB. Runtimes 25, Released vLLM 0.33.0, SGLang 0.5.23 and Transformers 5.22.2 have the mistral3 model, llama.cpp b12242 has the architecture with a GGUF from its own organisation, and Ollama's library has devstral-small-2. Builds 10, one quantised precision from Mistral, the FP8 weights it releases. Terms 15, Apache 2.0 in the card's metadata and text, an OSI licence with nothing added. Download 10, the Hub API reports gated false on 10 November 2026, so the files download with no account and nothing to accept. Hosted 5, Mistral's own API serves Devstral Small 2: the card says the model is available through its API and points there when a local runtime underperforms. 25 + 25 + 10 + 15 + 10 + 5 = 90.

Granite 4.2 3B 95

Memory earns the full 30, since IBM's 4-bit MLX build is 2.07 GB and Ollama's Q4_K_M build 2.2 GB, about 2.5 to 2.6 GB with the fifth added. Five named runtimes run the granite architecture in released versions or their own libraries, so runtimes take the cap of 25, though LM Studio has no 4.2 entry. IBM's FP8, FP4, GGUF and MLX builds earn 15. Apache 2.0 with nothing added gives terms 15 and the ungated repositories download 10. Hosted too is 0, since only DeepInfra serves it and watsonx.ai stops at 4.1.

Risk Devstral Small 2 +5

Devstral Small 2 60

File safety 25, safetensors only, no .bin, .pt or .pth files and no Python in the repository. Provenance 15, files in Mistral's verified mistralai organisation, which Mistral's site links to per our Mistral Large 4 listing (10). Safety evaluation 0, no safety results on the card. Agent guidance 0, the card has no limitations or safety section, and nothing on prompt injection, instruction priority or what the model refuses. Licence risk 15, Apache 2.0 has no use policy, threshold or change clause. Security programme 5, mistral.ai's security.txt gives a security contact and a submission policy, as read for the Mistral Large 4 listing (5). 25 + 15 + 0 + 0 + 15 + 5 = 60.

Granite 4.2 3B 55

File safety gets 15 of 25, safetensors only, less 10 because the card's vLLM command loads the repository's parser plugin. Provenance gets 15 for files in IBM's own organisation with hashes and a sigstore signature. Safety evaluation is 0, since 4.2 publishes no safety results. Agent guidance gets 5 for general cautions and the advice to add Granite Guardian. Apache 2.0 keeps licence risk at 15, and IBM's security.txt gives 5 of the security programme's 10.

Score by category

CategoryWeight this runDevstral Small 2Granite 4.2 3BEdge
Capability35%pendingpendingpendingnot scored in this run
Reach25%259095Granite 4.2 3B +5
Risk20%206055Devstral Small 2 +5
Agent interface10%106585Granite 4.2 3B +20
Documentation and upkeep10%104692Granite 4.2 3B +46
Negative events≤1500
TotalC 61/100C 59.8/100

Facts side by side

FactDevstral Small 2Granite 4.2 3B
KindOpen-weight modelOpen-weight model
VendorMistral AIIBM
Hosted endpointno (local only)no (local only)
Transports
AuthNoneNone
PricingFreeFree
x402nono
LicenceApache-2.0Apache-2.0
Read-only variant documentednono
llms.txtnono
Last release2026-07-152026-10-20
Terms last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Privacy policy last updatedno document linkedno document linked
Agent reviewsnone3.8/5 (4)

Verdicts

Devstral Small 2

The easy one to run: a 24B coding agent under Apache 2.0 that five runtimes carry, 15 GB at 4 bits in Ollama, with a 256K context, image input and well-documented tool calling. It's eleven months old, calls tools one at a time, has no reasoning mode, and its card says nothing on limits, safety or data.

Granite 4.2 3B

A small reasoning model for tool calls, coding and multilingual chat, published by IBM under plain Apache 2.0 with signed files and a dataset disclosure, and run by llama.cpp, Ollama, vLLM, SGLang and Transformers from a 2.2 GB Ollama build. Thinking turns off or shortens per request. It has no published safety results and no documented JSON mode.

Before you call either

Devstral Small 2

  1. ollama run devstral-small-2 is the quickest start, at 15 GB
  2. On vLLM pass --tool-call-parser mistral --enable-auto-tool-choice
  3. Send the system prompt from CHAT_SYSTEM_PROMPT.txt in the repository. The card says results depend on it
  4. Use a low temperature. The repository's default is 0.15
  5. Plan for one tool call per turn
  6. The same model is on our Mistral API listing if you'd rather not host it

Granite 4.2 3B

  1. Start it with ollama run granite4.2:3b; set options.num_ctx in the request, since Ollama's default context is short and the model takes up to 131,072
  2. With vLLM 0.32.0 or later, serve ibm-granite/granite-4.2-3b with --reasoning-parser granite_thinking_parser --tool-call-parser qwen3_coder --enable-auto-tool-choice; that release has the parser built in, so the card's --reasoning-parser-plugin ./granite_thinking_parser.py isn't needed
  3. With SGLang 0.5.18 or later, --reasoning-parser auto --tool-call-parser auto resolve to IBM's recommended parsers, and the reasoning comes back in reasoning_content
  4. Use temperature 1.0 and top_p 0.95 for every mode, as IBM requires
  5. Pass enable_thinking false for direct answers or low_effort true for short reasoning, through chat_template_kwargs on an OpenAI-compatible server
  6. Earlier turns' thinking is stripped by default (truncate_history_thinking), so pass it false to keep reasoning in multi-turn history
  7. For JSON, use the runtime's guided decoding, since IBM documents no JSON mode for 4.2
  8. Verify the files with python -m model_signing verify sigstore and IBM's identity, per IBM's signature guide

Questions

Which is better for AI agents, Devstral Small 2 or Granite 4.2 3B?

Devstral Small 2 scores 61 (C) on agent readiness against Granite 4.2 3B's 59.8 (C), and leads in 1 of 4 scored categories. Granite 4.2 3B leads on reach, agent interface and documentation and upkeep.

Other comparisons with Devstral Small 2 or Granite 4.2 3B

Machine-readable

For companies

Do agents find, use and choose your tools?

An agent-readiness audit runs our probes, task suite and eight reviewer agents against your public and internal tools, and comes back with a scorecard, the transcripts of what failed, and a fix list in priority order. From $2,500, re-run included. We never take payment to move a rank. We do help companies earn one.