Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs GPT-4.1 nano

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 57× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 27 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.5 Anthropic

50.5

Rank #47 Confirmed

GPT-4.1 nano OpenAI

27.9

Rank #327 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher in 10 categories and GPT-4.1 nano in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Opus 4.5 leads 56.5 to 21.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 80% for Claude Opus 4.5 and 0% for GPT-4.1 nano.
  • GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.5.
  • GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index50.527.9
Released2025-11-012025-04-14
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window200K1.05M
Max output64K33K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.10
Output $ / M tokens$25$0.40
Results tracked6938

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.8 (#27), GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
WeirdML63.7%19%
LMArena Coding15041306
SWE-bench Verified76.7%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)76.8%—
Aider Polyglot—8.9%
LMArena WebDev1494—
SWE-bench Multilingual70.7%—
SciCode—25.9%
GSO26.5%—
ALE-Bench1,025—
AlgoTune1.77—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 47.3 (#12), GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard77.5%33%
Terminal-Bench63.1%—
GDPval45.5%—
Remote Labor Index3.8%—
τ²-bench Airline84%—
τ²-bench Banking24.7%—
τ²-bench Retail79.6%—
τ²-bench Telecom92.3%—
Cybench82%—
DeepResearch Bench54.8%—
OSWorld66.3%—
BALROG43.5%—
LMArena Search1180—
METR Time Horizons75%—
Vending-Bench 24,967—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 42.6 (#51), GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
ARC-AGI-237.6%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.2%33.3%
ARC-AGI-180%0%
LMArena Hard Prompts14761286
DTBench89.9%52.5%
LMCA44.5%5.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index150.09129.62
SimpleBench62%—
NYT Connections (extended)52.5%—
CritPt—0%
Chess Puzzles12%—
EnigmaEval11.9%—
EBR-Bench14.3%—
Mystery Game Puzzles22%—
ForecastBench60.7—

Math Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 38.6 (#132), GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202586.1%28.9%
LMArena Math14631274
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)20.7%1%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)34.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 44.9%—
ProofBench36%—
Omni-MATH—36.7%
MATH Level 5—70%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)4.2%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 56.5 (#44), GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
GPQA Diamond86%48.9%
SimpleQA Verified45.7%6%
LMArena Expert14871272
Humanity's Last Exam25.2%—
MMLU-Pro—55%
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.9%—
GPQA (HELM)—50.7%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 31.4 (#107), GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Vision—1063
GeoBench75%—
VPCT40%—
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1462—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 54.3 (#47), GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Non-English14381260
LMArena Chinese14701270
LMArena German14491288
LMArena Japanese14161198
LMArena Russian14471261
LMArena French1471—
LMArena Korean1424—
LMArena Spanish1458—

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 77.5 (#19), GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Instruction Following14781267
IFEval—84.3%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 46.5 (#22), GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Longer Query14801283
Fiction.LiveBench—25%
CL-bench21.1%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.5 leads

Claude Opus 4.5: 68.1 (#28), GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.5GPT-4.1 nano
LMArena Text14511285
LMArena Creative Writing14451260
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1687946
LMArena Multi-Turn14661277
WildBench—81.2%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.5 better than GPT-4.1 nano?

Claude Opus 4.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.5 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 57× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-4.1 nano?

GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.5 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 or GPT-4.1 nano better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 54.8 versus 24.1 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.5 and GPT-4.1 nano share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.5 has 69 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 nano has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper