That depended very much on many factors:
- how strong was the king/emperor
- how important was the noble in question
- how important was it to reward that noble
- what time period are we talking about
A higher ranking title didn't automatically bring more benefits. It usually did, but was not the rule. A count is a title lower than duke or archduke. Yet, some counts (the counts of Flanders and of Holland) were pretty powerful. Whereas an Austrian archduke was mostly an honorary title. There were many princes with little power and barons with immense power.
There wasn't a typical land grant for any title. That was the king's privilege. He awarded land and titles as he saw fit. The duchy of Normandy was given away or granted almost as ransom payment or blackmail. The first duke of Normandy was a Norman, he got his duchy to stop him from pillaging other parts of France and protect the kingdom. I doubt very much if the king like that, but he didn't have many alternatives.
Your question is very broad, I give some reasons why it varied so much. Even the titles changed over times. A Roman comes (count) was a higher position than a ducus (duke). Later that changed around. By the way, the titles comes and ducus were, when originally created, positions. Not inheritable titles. That changed as well (and pretty quick at that).
What you infer is a kind of system where a higher ranking noble got more land than a lower ranking noble, based on seniority. As in the civil service today. That definitely was not the case.