Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.7 vs GPT-4.1 mini

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.4 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 mini costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 35 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.7 Anthropic

58.4

Rank #17 Confirmed

GPT-4.1 mini OpenAI

33.5

Rank #232 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 35 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher in 10 categories and GPT-4.1 mini in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.7 leads 66.5 to 23.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 93.5% for Claude Opus 4.7 and 3.5% for GPT-4.1 mini.
  • GPT-4.1 mini is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.7.
  • GPT-4.1 mini accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index58.433.5
Released2026-04-142025-04-14
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.60
Results tracked6647

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 59.9 (#10), GPT-4.1 mini: 30.4 (#286)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
SciCode54.5%40.4%
WeirdML76.4%37.6%
LMArena Coding15191367
SWE-bench Verified83.5%—
FrontierCode38.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—23.9%
Aider Polyglot—32.4%
LMArena WebDev1557—
GSO44.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—48.9%
MirrorCode31.1%—
CadEval—16%
ALE-Bench1,323—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 47.9 (#8), GPT-4.1 mini: 33.0 (#52)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
Terminal-Bench80.2%—
APEX-Agents49.2%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—50.5%
OSWorld 2.018.2%—
τ²-bench Banking40.2%—
PostTrainBench28.6%—
ExploitBench26.5%—
GBAEval43.8%—
GDP.pdf21%—
LMArena Search1233—
Vending-Bench 210,937—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 53.7 (#24), GPT-4.1 mini: 10.9 (#335)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
ARC-AGI-275.8%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark80.7%48.6%
ARC-AGI-193.5%3.5%
CritPt12%0%
Chess Puzzles30%7%
LMArena Hard Prompts15071349
Mystery Game Puzzles28%7%
DTBench94.7%68.8%
LMCA52.2%21.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index156.39135.01
SimpleBench61.7%—
NYT Connections (extended)39%—
Thematic Generalization72.8%—
EBR-Bench19%—
ForecastBench60.3—

Math Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 66.5 (#20), GPT-4.1 mini: 23.1 (#264)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)70.2%6.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202597.8%44.7%
LMArena Math14991343
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)43.8%4.5%
FrontierMath Tier 431.7%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions73.6%—
ProofBench54%—
Omni-MATH—49.1%
MATH Level 5—87.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 62.6 (#20), GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#183)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
GPQA Diamond90.2%65.8%
SimpleQA Verified51.7%12.7%
LMArena Expert15211338
Humanity's Last Exam36.2%—
MMLU-Pro—78.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12%—
GPQA (HELM)—61.4%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 41.5 (#29), GPT-4.1 mini: 35.2 (#77)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Vision13171181
Blueprint-Bench 224.5%—
Furniture Assembly33.3%—
LMArena Document1495—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 57.5 (#9), GPT-4.1 mini: 45.9 (#161)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Non-English14811318
LMArena Chinese15301329
LMArena French15051357
LMArena German14941349
LMArena Japanese14721291
LMArena Korean14661298
LMArena Russian14941324
LMArena Spanish14971319

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 78.6 (#9), GPT-4.1 mini: 73.9 (#113)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Instruction Following14981332
IFEval—90.4%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 46.1 (#24), GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#270)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Longer Query15051344
Fiction.LiveBench—44.4%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.7 leads

Claude Opus 4.7: 75.3 (#8), GPT-4.1 mini: 48.8 (#193)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Text14911341
LMArena Creative Writing14861300
EQ-Bench Creative Writing19141147
LMArena Multi-Turn15061354
WildBench—83.8%
EQ-Bench 41311—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.7 better than GPT-4.1 mini?

Claude Opus 4.7 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.4 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 mini costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.7's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-4.1 mini?

GPT-4.1 mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or GPT-4.1 mini better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.7 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 30.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.7 and GPT-4.1 mini share?

35 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.7 has 66 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 mini has 47.

Related comparisons

Go deeper