Solar resource assessments most generally require atmospheric information, which is customarily acquired from gridded datasets. The spatial scale mismatch problem, i.e., the difference in spatial representativeness of gridded data and in situ measurements, therefore becomes relevant. This study examines how the gridded data used as inputs to clear-sky radiation models can affect their performance at urban scale. The tropical island of Singapore is selected for the case study. Aerosol optical depth at 550 nm (AOD550), Å ngström exponent (AE), and precipitable water (PW) from both the MERRA-2 reanalysis and ground-based stations (AERONET and SuomiNet) are collected between 2013–2020. Firstly, it is found that, relatively to the AERONET ground truth, the bias in MERRA-2’s AOD550 is more prominent than that in AE or PW. Next, the bias propagation from the gridded inputs (AOD550, AE, and PW) to clear-sky radiation predictions is explored using various models. The estimated clear-sky direct normal irradiance (DNIcs) is more sensitive to AOD550 variation than the clear-sky global horizontal irradiance (GHIcs). Six clear-sky radiation models, five of which accept MERRA-2 gridded inputs, are compared with each other, and with the in situ irradiance measurements recorded at 9 sites. The inter-model difference across Singapore is remarkably consistent because the whole island fits inside a single MERRA-2 grid cell. Under high-AOD550 situations, however, the inter-model deviation becomes large for both GHIcs and DNIcs. The conventional model-versus-measurement comparison shows that each model achieves very different site-to-site performance, largely because the spatially-averaged inputs cannot fully represent the micro-climatic variability. Relatively speaking, no clear-sky radiation model significantly outperforms its peers. The simple MAC2 model and the empirical (locally derived) Yang GHIcs-only model are recommended for Singapore.