Model decision surface

Compare AI models

Start with granite 3.1 3b a800m instruct and UserLM 8b, or choose any two current ranked language models. Compare capability evidence, price, context, provider availability, and weight access without pretending one field decides every use case.

First modelSecond model

Current public data

granite 3.1 3b a800m instruct vs UserLM 8b

Live dataset updated 9/22/2026, 3:10:38 AM UTC

Open 1200×630 evidence receipt

Factual comparison of granite 3.1 3b a800m instruct and UserLM 8b
Field	granite 3.1 3b a800m instruct IBM Granite	UserLM 8b Microsoft
ModelCap position	#236	#238
Index score	7.3	7.1
Evidence	Estimatedpublisher-corpus-prior over 203 held-out anchors (7%); launch card against 2 resolved peers on 4 rows (94%); no cross-lab optimism probe available; shrunk 0.7 up toward the measured corpus	Inheritedfinetune of meta-llama/Llama-3.1-8B · finetune (100%)
Input / 1M	Unavailable	Unavailable
Output / 1M	Unavailable	Unavailable
Pricing status	unavailable	unavailable
Context	—	—
Providers	0	0
Weight access	Open weights	Open weights

Decision facts

granite 3.1 3b a800m instruct is #236; UserLM 8b is #238 on the same current language board.
Index scores are 7.3 for granite 3.1 3b a800m instruct and 7.1 for UserLM 8b. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.
Evidence differs: granite 3.1 3b a800m instruct is Estimated; UserLM 8b is Inherited.

These are separate published fields, not a synthetic winner. ModelCap does not collapse price, access, context, and capability evidence into a hidden recommendation score.

Popular comparisons

Each comparison page is a permanent, shareable URL with the same live figures as this tool: ModelCap Index position, API pricing, context window, provider count, weight access and every shared benchmark board.