Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-4.1

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 35.7 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 41 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.3

Rank #18 Confirmed

GPT-4.1 OpenAI

35.7

Rank #215 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 41 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 9 categories and GPT-4.1 in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 57.7 to 11.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 94% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 5.5% for GPT-4.1.
  • GPT-4.1 is cheaper at $2 / $8 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
  • GPT-4.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index58.335.7
Released2026-02-042025-04-14
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2
Output $ / M tokens$25$8
Results tracked6852

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.7 (#15), GPT-4.1: 34.2 (#228)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
SWE-bench Verified78.7%48.5%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%39.6%
WeirdML78%39%
LMArena Coding15351391
ALE-Bench996.5558.1
FrontierCode26.6%—
Aider Polyglot—52.4%
LMArena WebDev1546—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
GSO41.2%—
CadEval—42%
AlgoTune1.47—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.0 (#4), GPT-4.1: 34.4 (#40)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—54%
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—
Vending-Bench 28,018—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.7 (#21), GPT-4.1: 11.7 (#334)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
ARC-AGI-269.2%0.4%
SimpleBench67.6%27%
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%52.3%
ARC-AGI-194%5.5%
Chess Puzzles17%6%
EnigmaEval7.6%2.2%
LMArena Hard Prompts15271384
DTBench91.2%68.3%
LMCA55.8%25.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.36136.79
ForecastBench6061.5
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 62.7 (#25), GPT-4.1: 21.4 (#269)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%38.3%
LMArena Math15171369
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%5.5%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%0%
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
ProofBench50%—
Omni-MATH—47.1%
MATH Level 5—83%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.8 (#23), GPT-4.1: 37.0 (#152)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
GPQA Diamond90.5%66.9%
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%5.4%
SimpleQA Verified47%31.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%5.6%
LMArena Expert15461364
MMLU-Pro—81.1%
GPQA (HELM)—65.9%

Multimodal Too close to call

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.0 (#67), GPT-4.1: 37.5 (#66)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
LMArena Vision13161210
GeoBench—72%
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 58.2 (#4), GPT-4.1: 49.6 (#128)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
LMArena Non-English14901370
LMArena Chinese15511382
LMArena French15131383
LMArena German15041380
LMArena Japanese14841320
LMArena Korean14651339
LMArena Russian14971377
LMArena Spanish15121375

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.7 (#3), GPT-4.1: 71.5 (#148)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
LMArena Instruction Following15231367
IFEval—83.8%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), GPT-4.1: 40.0 (#158)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
LMArena Longer Query15201385
Fiction.LiveBench—63.9%
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.7 (#9), GPT-4.1: 57.8 (#120)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1
LMArena Text15041383
LMArena Creative Writing15061363
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18091420
LMArena Multi-Turn15141398
WildBench—85.4%
EQ-Bench 41223—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than GPT-4.1?

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.3 to 35.7 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-4.1?

GPT-4.1 is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $8 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-4.1 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.7 versus 34.2 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-4.1 share?

41 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 has 52.

Related comparisons

Go deeper