Your question is a bot confusing....but yes of course granite is granular, rather it is hypidiomorphic granular where greater proportion of the crystallized minerals have subhedral forms.
Diorite is similar to granite in texture.
Whereas sand stone...contain clasts/ grains of sand size.
The minerals in granite are magmatogenic, whereas in sandstone they are detrital in origin
the term “granular” is a general term used in petrography, soil sciences, and in particular cases in paleontology, too, to describe a texture or an assembly made up of grains equigranular in dimension, irrespective of the origin of the rock, be it clastic/sedimentogenic, e.g., an arenite or magmatogenic, as it is the case with equigranular granite. There are other terms built upon this term such as granoblastic used in metamorphic rocks, granulation to describe the disintegration into granular material or granulometry the way how to measure the size of the grains. It is a rather general answer of mine to show that you should refrain from using the term too restricted and focus on magmatic intrusive rocks, only.
Indeed a bit confusing your question...the term defines a texture, structure not a type of rock ...you need to relate to types of texture and structure...indeed granite is granular magmatic rock and sandstone is a sedimentary rock with granular aspect ..the difference comes from the way they are born
I think is a lot depending on the point of view or the scope of your search...If you refer to description of granite you see it as texture , structure ..granular but granite is a magmatic rock...if your study is about granular structure than you have various examples in all 3 types of rocks: magmatic metamorphic and sedimentary . Each category is formed different so the characteristics will be different and you need to look into different aspects. If is for magmatic you look micro and macroscopic and mineralogic, for sedimentary you look of % of granules in composition and liaison, form, frequency and size of granules and for metamorphic you have to see it as a mixed method as could be a sedimentary rock metamorphosed through magmatic phenomenon or ...tectonic ...or...
If you are into the material behaviour when it was a magma (rather than texture vocabulary), that is when enough melt was present so that it could be deformed without any intra cristaline deformation (e.g. the grains can acquire a preferred orientation), it could be described as a granular material analogue. However, the fact that the crystals are somewhat "in suspension in a dense liquid" brings a factor which is not into play in most studies that deal with granular material. Physicist also use the term of slurry (slurries) for material made of "a thick suspension of particles in liquid" which is of some interest for geologists dealing with muds, lahars... and magma.