Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-4.1 mini

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

Last verified . 35 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #9 Confirmed

GPT-4.1 mini OpenAI

33.5

Rank #232 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 35 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8 leads 78.2 to 23.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 92.5% for Claude Opus 4.8 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 4.8.
  • GPT-4.1 mini accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index60.733.5
Released2026-05-282025-04-14
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.60
Results tracked6547

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 mini: 30.4 (#286)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
SciCode53.5%40.4%
WeirdML82.9%37.6%
LMArena Coding14911367
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—23.9%
Aider Polyglot—32.4%
LMArena WebDev1556—
GSO47.1%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—48.9%
CadEval—16%
ALE-Bench1,564—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#10), GPT-4.1 mini: 33.0 (#52)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
APEX-Agents48.9%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—50.5%
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 mini: 10.9 (#335)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
ARC-AGI-272.1%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%48.6%
ARC-AGI-192.5%3.5%
CritPt20.9%0%
Chess Puzzles34%7%
LMArena Hard Prompts14811349
Mystery Game Puzzles36%7%
DTBench94.9%68.8%
LMCA57.5%21.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index158.3135.01
SimpleBench64.8%—
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%—
EnigmaEval23.5%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
ForecastBench59.9—

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.2 (#11), GPT-4.1 mini: 23.1 (#264)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%6.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%44.7%
LMArena Math14871343
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%4.5%
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%—
ProofBench69%—
Omni-MATH—49.1%
MATH Level 5—87.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#26), GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#183)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
GPQA Diamond91%65.8%
SimpleQA Verified53%12.7%
LMArena Expert15011338
MMLU-Pro—78.3%
GPQA (HELM)—61.4%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 43.2 (#20), GPT-4.1 mini: 35.2 (#77)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Vision12951181
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 mini: 45.9 (#161)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Non-English14501318
LMArena Chinese15091329
LMArena French14821357
LMArena German14701349
LMArena Japanese14401291
LMArena Korean14321298
LMArena Russian14761324
LMArena Spanish14701319

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.6 (#22), GPT-4.1 mini: 73.9 (#113)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Instruction Following14761332
IFEval—90.4%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#37), GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#270)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Longer Query14821344
Fiction.LiveBench—44.4%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.1 (#17), GPT-4.1 mini: 48.8 (#193)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Text14601341
LMArena Creative Writing14531300
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18401147
LMArena Multi-Turn14761354
WildBench—83.8%
EQ-Bench 41281—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-4.1 mini?

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

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

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

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

35 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 mini has 47.

Related comparisons

Go deeper