uttapen

Granite 4.0 Micro vs Laguna XS 2.1

Both sit behind the same key and the same code on uttapen — the only thing that changes is the model string, so you can run each of them against your own workload without touching anything else. On cost, Granite 4.0 Micro comes out about 1.4× cheaper.

FeatureGranite 4.0 MicroLaguna XS 2.1
ProviderIBM GranitePoolside
Model idibm-granite/granite-4.0-h-micropoolside/laguna-xs-2.1
Context131,000 tokens262,144 tokens
Max output117,900 tokens32,768 tokens
Input / 1M tokens4,932 toman17,408 toman
Output / 1M tokens32,494 toman34,815 toman
≈ one 1,000-word request49 toman68 toman
Input cachingNo8,704 toman / 1M
Image inputNoNo
File inputNoNo
Tool callingNoYes
JSON outputYesNo
Reasoning modeNoYes

Which one for what?

Granite 4.0 Micro

  • High-volume work where cost per call decides
49 toman per 1,000 words · Model page

Laguna XS 2.1

  • Multi-step problems, maths, and tracking down a bug
  • Whole documents or a codebase in a single request
  • Agents that call your own APIs and database
  • High-volume work where cost per call decides
68 toman per 1,000 words · Model page

Run both with the same code

Swap the model value between the two ids and send the same request twice; what each answer cost comes back in the X-Uttapen-Cost-Toman header.

curl https://api.uttapen.ir/v1/chat/completions \
  -H "Authorization: Bearer sk-up-…" \
  -H "Content-Type: application/json" \
  -d '{
    "model": "ibm-granite/granite-4.0-h-micro",
    "messages": [{"role": "user", "content": "Introduce yourself in one sentence."}],
    "stream": true
  }'

model = "poolside/laguna-xs-2.1"

More comparisons: all pairs · model rankings · full catalogue

base_url = https://api.uttapen.ir/v1