Model comparison
Claude Opus 4 vs GPT-4.1 mini
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 mini costs 43× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 39 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 39 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4 scores higher in 9 categories and GPT-4.1 mini in 1 category; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4 leads 42.0 to 24.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SWE-bench Verified (bash only): 67.6% for Claude Opus 4 and 23.9% for GPT-4.1 mini.
- GPT-4.1 mini is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.
- GPT-4.1 mini accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 43.1 | 33.6 |
| Released | 2025-05-22 | 2025-04-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 32K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $15 | $0.40 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $75 | $1.60 |
| Results tracked | 56 | 47 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 47.2 (#62), GPT-4.1 mini: 30.6 (#293)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 67.6% | 23.9% |
| Aider Polyglot | 72% | 32.4% |
| WeirdML | 43.7% | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1442 | 1367 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 70.7% | — |
| SciCode | — | 40.4% |
| GSO | 6.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 48.9% |
| CadEval | — | 16% |
| AlgoTune | 1.33 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 34.8 (#42), GPT-4.1 mini: 33.3 (#55)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 50.5% |
| Cybench | 38% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 46.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1127 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 63.9% | — |
Reasoning Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 27.3 (#121), GPT-4.1 mini: 10.8 (#340)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 8.6% | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 74.3% | 48.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 35.7% | 3.5% |
| CritPt | 0.3% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1399 | 1349 |
| DTBench | 81.6% | 68.8% |
| LMCA | 37.4% | 21.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 142.67 | 135.01 |
| SimpleBench | 58.8% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | — | 7% |
| EnigmaEval | 5.6% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | — | 7% |
| ForecastBench | 61.1 | — |
Math Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 42.0 (#86), GPT-4.1 mini: 24.1 (#270)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 64.4% | 44.7% |
| Omni-MATH | 61.6% | 49.1% |
| LMArena Math | 1390 | 1343 |
| MATH Level 5 | 85% | 87.3% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | 4.5% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 6.7% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 44.0 (#88), GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#194)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 76.3% | 65.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.5% | 78.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | 70.8% | 61.4% |
| LMArena Expert | 1386 | 1338 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 10.7% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 12.7% |
| Confabulations | 15.9% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 12% | — |
Multimodal GPT-4.1 mini leads
Claude Opus 4: 31.5 (#106), GPT-4.1 mini: 35.8 (#82)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1192 | 1181 |
| GeoBench | 49% | — |
| VPCT | 38% | — |
Multilingual Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 48.8 (#138), GPT-4.1 mini: 45.7 (#166)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1362 | 1318 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1386 | 1329 |
| LMArena French | 1372 | 1358 |
| LMArena German | 1391 | 1351 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1331 | 1290 |
| LMArena Korean | 1321 | 1298 |
| LMArena Russian | 1392 | 1324 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1389 | 1319 |
Instruction Following Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 77.1 (#28), GPT-4.1 mini: 73.7 (#118)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 91.8% | 90.4% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1406 | 1333 |
Long Context Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 39.6 (#172), GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#275)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 61.1% | 44.4% |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1422 | 1344 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4 leads
Claude Opus 4: 61.2 (#89), GPT-4.1 mini: 48.6 (#199)
| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1377 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1387 | 1300 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1580 | 1147 |
| WildBench | 85.2% | 83.8% |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1396 | 1354 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 83.6% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Opus 4 better than GPT-4.1 mini?
Claude Opus 4 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.1 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 mini costs 43× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4 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 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Opus 4 or GPT-4.1 mini better for coding?
Claude Opus 4 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 47.2 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-4.1 mini does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4 and GPT-4.1 mini share?
39 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4 has 56 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 mini has 47.