Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-4.1

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 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 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 37 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #9 Confirmed

GPT-4.1 OpenAI

35.7

Rank #215 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 37 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 10 categories and GPT-4.1 in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.2 to 21.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 92.5% for Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8.
  • GPT-4.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index60.735.7
Released2026-05-282025-04-14
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2
Output $ / M tokens$25$8
Results tracked6552

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 60.2 (#9), GPT-4.1: 34.2 (#228)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
WeirdML82.9%39%
LMArena Coding14911391
ALE-Bench1,564558.1
SWE-bench Verified—48.5%
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—39.6%
Aider Polyglot—52.4%
LMArena WebDev1556—
SciCode53.5%—
GSO47.1%—
CadEval—42%

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#10), GPT-4.1: 34.4 (#40)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
APEX-Agents48.9%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—54%
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
Remote Labor Index8.3%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
DeepResearch Bench50.2%—
PostTrainBench33.8%—
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
LMArena Search1204—
Vending-Bench 25,787—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.6 (#14), GPT-4.1: 11.7 (#334)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
ARC-AGI-272.1%0.4%
SimpleBench64.8%27%
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%52.3%
ARC-AGI-192.5%5.5%
Chess Puzzles34%6%
EnigmaEval23.5%2.2%
LMArena Hard Prompts14811384
DTBench94.9%68.3%
LMCA57.5%25.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index158.3136.79
ForecastBench59.961.5
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%—
CritPt20.9%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.2 (#11), GPT-4.1: 21.4 (#269)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%38.3%
LMArena Math14871369
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%5.5%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%0%
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%—
ProofBench69%—
Omni-MATH—47.1%
MATH Level 5—83%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#26), GPT-4.1: 37.0 (#152)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
GPQA Diamond91%66.9%
SimpleQA Verified53%31.1%
LMArena Expert15011364
Humanity's Last Exam—5.4%
MMLU-Pro—81.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.6%
GPQA (HELM)—65.9%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 43.2 (#20), GPT-4.1: 37.5 (#66)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Vision12951210
GeoBench—72%
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
LMArena Document1475—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.4 (#31), GPT-4.1: 49.6 (#128)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Non-English14501370
LMArena Chinese15091382
LMArena French14821383
LMArena German14701380
LMArena Japanese14401320
LMArena Korean14321339
LMArena Russian14761377
LMArena Spanish14701375

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.6 (#22), GPT-4.1: 71.5 (#148)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Instruction Following14761367
IFEval—83.8%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#37), GPT-4.1: 40.0 (#158)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Longer Query14821385
Fiction.LiveBench—63.9%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.1 (#17), GPT-4.1: 57.8 (#120)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Text14601383
LMArena Creative Writing14531363
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18401420
LMArena Multi-Turn14761398
WildBench—85.4%
EQ-Bench 41281—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-4.1?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 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 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4.1 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 60.2 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 4.8 and GPT-4.1 share?

37 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 has 52.

Related comparisons

Go deeper