Pick Fugu Max for cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60% or 1m-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens. Pick IBM Granite 4.1 for enterprise-grade open weights - apache 2.0, iso 42001-certified, cryptographically signed or efficient hybrid mamba-2/transformer design - much lower memory and faster inference. Choose IBM Granite 4.1 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Fugu Max if you want a managed API.
Fugu Max (Sakana AI) and IBM Granite 4.1 (IBM) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Fugu Max is sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens. IBM Granite 4.1 is iBM's most complete open-weight enterprise release - small, Apache-2.0, long-context and governance-friendly, built to deploy efficiently rather than top the leaderboard. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Cost model: IBM Granite 4.1 ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Fugu Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
Context window: Fugu Max holds 2× more — 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) vs 512K (~768 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
Recency: Fugu Max is the newer model by about 4 months (released September 10, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Specifications
Spec
Fugu Max
IBM Granite 4.1
Provider
Sakana AI (Global)
IBM (US)
Released
September 10, 2026
April 29, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
512K (~768 pages)
Price (in/out)
$2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts Claude Sonnet 5 and Kimi K3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%: Fugu Max — IBM Granite 4.1 is comparatively weak here — not a frontier-intelligence competitor - built for efficient deployment, not top benchmark scores
1M-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens: Fugu Max — Its 1M tokens window holds about 2× more than IBM Granite 4.1's 512K in a single prompt.
OpenAI-compatible API — drop-in replacement for single-model integrations: Fugu Max — IBM Granite 4.1 is comparatively weak here — best as a workhorse; reasoning-heavy tasks favor larger models
Enterprise-grade open weights - Apache 2.0, ISO 42001-certified, cryptographically signed: IBM Granite 4.1 — Open weights make this possible at all — Fugu Max is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Efficient hybrid Mamba-2/transformer design - much lower memory and faster inference: IBM Granite 4.1 — Fugu Max is comparatively weak here — the cheaper sibling to Fugu Ultra v2 — lower ceiling on the hardest reasoning tasks
512K-token context on small, deployable dense models (3B/8B/30B): IBM Granite 4.1 — Fugu Max is comparatively weak here — not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that routes tasks across a pool of other models, so raw benchmark comparisons to monolithic models can be misleading
Lowest cost at scale: IBM Granite 4.1 — Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Fugu Max's $2/$6 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input: Fugu Max — Its 1M tokens window is about 2× larger than IBM Granite 4.1's 512K, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume: IBM Granite 4.1 — At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Fugu Max, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases: Fugu Max — Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: IBM Granite 4.1 — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Fugu Max is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%: Fugu Max — It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is enterprise-grade open weights - apache 2.0, iso 42001-certified, cryptographically signed: IBM Granite 4.1 — That is its strongest area.
Fugu Max: where it fits
Sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens. Released September 10, 2026 by Sakana AI, it is built for cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts Claude Sonnet 5 and Kimi K3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%, 1M-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens, and openAI-compatible API — drop-in replacement for single-model integrations.
Its trade-offs are real: not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that routes tasks across a pool of other models, so raw benchmark comparisons to monolithic models can be misleading, the cheaper sibling to Fugu Ultra v2 — lower ceiling on the hardest reasoning tasks, and a young, first-generation product from Sakana AI's orchestration approach, unproven at scale versus established frontier labs. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
IBM Granite 4.1: where it fits
IBM's most complete open-weight enterprise release - small, Apache-2.0, long-context and governance-friendly, built to deploy efficiently rather than top the leaderboard. Released April 29, 2026 by IBM, it is built for enterprise-grade open weights - Apache 2.0, ISO 42001-certified, cryptographically signed, efficient hybrid Mamba-2/transformer design - much lower memory and faster inference, 512K-token context on small, deployable dense models (3B/8B/30B), and free to self-host; governance-friendly for on-prem and regulated deployments.
Its trade-offs: not a frontier-intelligence competitor - built for efficient deployment, not top benchmark scores, best as a workhorse; reasoning-heavy tasks favor larger models, instruct models are text-focused (vision and speech are separate family members), and efficiency and performance claims are IBM's own. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. IBM Granite 4.1 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Fugu Max gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Frequently asked questions
Is Fugu Max or IBM Granite 4.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Fugu Max leans toward cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60% while IBM Granite 4.1 leans toward enterprise-grade open weights - apache 2.0, iso 42001-certified, cryptographically signed, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Fugu Max or IBM Granite 4.1?
IBM Granite 4.1 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Fugu Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Fugu Max — 1M tokens vs 512K, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Fugu Max and IBM Granite 4.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Fugu Max, IBM Granite 4.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Fugu Max or IBM Granite 4.1?
Fugu Max — released September 10, 2026, about 4 months after IBM Granite 4.1.
Fugu Max vs IBM Granite 4.1
Sakana AI · Global | IBM · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Fugu Max for cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60% or 1m-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens. Pick IBM Granite 4.1 for enterprise-grade open weights - apache 2.0, iso 42001-certified, cryptographically signed or efficient hybrid mamba-2/transformer design - much lower memory and faster inference. Choose IBM Granite 4.1 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Fugu Max if you want a managed API.
Fugu Max (Sakana AI) and IBM Granite 4.1 (IBM) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Fugu Max is sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens. IBM Granite 4.1 is iBM's most complete open-weight enterprise release - small, Apache-2.0, long-context and governance-friendly, built to deploy efficiently rather than top the leaderboard. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Cost model: IBM Granite 4.1 ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Fugu Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
▸Context window: Fugu Max holds 2× more — 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) vs 512K (~768 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
▸Recency: Fugu Max is the newer model by about 4 months (released September 10, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
Spec
Fugu Max
IBM Granite 4.1
Provider
Sakana AI (Global)
IBM (US)
Released
September 10, 2026
April 29, 2026
Context window
1M tokens (~1,500 pages)
512K (~768 pages)
Price (in/out)
$2/$6 per 1M tokens
Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?
No — API only
Yes — self-hostable
Modalities
text
text, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
Not published
Who wins what
Cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts Claude Sonnet 5 and Kimi K3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%
Fugu Max
IBM Granite 4.1 is comparatively weak here — not a frontier-intelligence competitor - built for efficient deployment, not top benchmark scores
1M-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens
Fugu Max
Its 1M tokens window holds about 2× more than IBM Granite 4.1's 512K in a single prompt.
OpenAI-compatible API — drop-in replacement for single-model integrations
Fugu Max
IBM Granite 4.1 is comparatively weak here — best as a workhorse; reasoning-heavy tasks favor larger models
Enterprise-grade open weights - Apache 2.0, ISO 42001-certified, cryptographically signed
IBM Granite 4.1
Open weights make this possible at all — Fugu Max is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Efficient hybrid Mamba-2/transformer design - much lower memory and faster inference
IBM Granite 4.1
Fugu Max is comparatively weak here — the cheaper sibling to Fugu Ultra v2 — lower ceiling on the hardest reasoning tasks
512K-token context on small, deployable dense models (3B/8B/30B)
IBM Granite 4.1
Fugu Max is comparatively weak here — not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that routes tasks across a pool of other models, so raw benchmark comparisons to monolithic models can be misleading
Lowest cost at scale
IBM Granite 4.1
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Fugu Max's $2/$6 per 1M tokens.
Largest single-prompt input
Fugu Max
Its 1M tokens window is about 2× larger than IBM Granite 4.1's 512K, fitting roughly 1,500 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ IBM Granite 4.1
At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Fugu Max, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Fugu Max
Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ IBM Granite 4.1
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Fugu Max is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%
→ Fugu Max
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is enterprise-grade open weights - apache 2.0, iso 42001-certified, cryptographically signed
→ IBM Granite 4.1
That is its strongest area.
Fugu Max: where it fits
Sakana AI's cost-first multi-agent orchestration model — not a single trained model, but a routed pool of models behind one API, priced at $2/$6 per million tokens. Released September 10, 2026 by Sakana AI, it is built for cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts Claude Sonnet 5 and Kimi K3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60%, 1M-token context window at $2/$6 per million tokens, and openAI-compatible API — drop-in replacement for single-model integrations.
Its trade-offs are real: not a single trained model — Sakana describes Fugu as "a Multi-Agent System, Delivered as One Model" that routes tasks across a pool of other models, so raw benchmark comparisons to monolithic models can be misleading, the cheaper sibling to Fugu Ultra v2 — lower ceiling on the hardest reasoning tasks, and a young, first-generation product from Sakana AI's orchestration approach, unproven at scale versus established frontier labs. At $2 in / $6 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
IBM Granite 4.1: where it fits
IBM's most complete open-weight enterprise release - small, Apache-2.0, long-context and governance-friendly, built to deploy efficiently rather than top the leaderboard. Released April 29, 2026 by IBM, it is built for enterprise-grade open weights - Apache 2.0, ISO 42001-certified, cryptographically signed, efficient hybrid Mamba-2/transformer design - much lower memory and faster inference, 512K-token context on small, deployable dense models (3B/8B/30B), and free to self-host; governance-friendly for on-prem and regulated deployments.
Its trade-offs: not a frontier-intelligence competitor - built for efficient deployment, not top benchmark scores, best as a workhorse; reasoning-heavy tasks favor larger models, instruct models are text-focused (vision and speech are separate family members), and efficiency and performance claims are IBM's own. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. IBM Granite 4.1 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Fugu Max gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Fugu Max and IBM Granite 4.1 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Fugu Max leans toward cost-efficient multi-agent orchestration — undercuts claude sonnet 5 and kimi k3 on output cost by a claimed 40-60% while IBM Granite 4.1 leans toward enterprise-grade open weights - apache 2.0, iso 42001-certified, cryptographically signed, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Fugu Max or IBM Granite 4.1?
IBM Granite 4.1 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Fugu Max is API-metered at $2/$6 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Fugu Max — 1M tokens vs 512K, about 2× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Fugu Max and IBM Granite 4.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Fugu Max, IBM Granite 4.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Fugu Max or IBM Granite 4.1?
Fugu Max — released September 10, 2026, about 4 months after IBM Granite 4.1.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.