Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-4.1 nano
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 19 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in 10 categories and GPT-4.1 nano in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 87.9 to 26.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 100% for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 28.9% for GPT-4.1 nano.
- GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for Claude Sonnet 5.5.
- GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 61.9 | 27.9 |
| Released | 2026-09-28 | 2025-04-14 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 33K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 32 | 38 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 67.3 (#6), GPT-4.1 nano: 24.1 (#330)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 61% | 25.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1513 | 1306 |
| FrontierCode | 52.1% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 8.9% |
| CursorBench | 55.5% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1774 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 61.9% | — |
| WeirdML | — | 19% |
| ALE-Bench | 1,819 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.0 (#16), GPT-4.1 nano: 26.5 (#104)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 75.5% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 33% |
Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 54.0 (#28), GPT-4.1 nano: 8.5 (#349)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 31.4% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1495 | 1286 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 165.03 | 129.62 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 33.3% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80.5% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 0% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 65% | — |
| DTBench | — | 52.5% |
| LMCA | — | 5.5% |
Math Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 87.9 (#6), GPT-4.1 nano: 26.9 (#252)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 28.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1510 | 1274 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 88.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 80.5% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 36.7% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 70% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 2.9% | — |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#12), GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#273)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 95.6% | 48.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.5% | 6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1540 | 1272 |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 55% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 50.7% |
Multimodal Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 51.5 (#6), GPT-4.1 nano: 29.2 (#113)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1289 | 1063 |
| Furniture Assembly | 75% | — |
Multilingual Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 55.3 (#30), GPT-4.1 nano: 41.6 (#205)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1452 | 1260 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1522 | 1270 |
| LMArena Russian | 1451 | 1261 |
| LMArena German | — | 1288 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1198 |
Instruction Following Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 78.3 (#11), GPT-4.1 nano: 67.8 (#193)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1495 | 1267 |
| IFEval | — | 84.3% |
Long Context Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 45.9 (#28), GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#296)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1498 | 1283 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 25% |
Writing & Preference Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#40), GPT-4.1 nano: 40.5 (#243)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | GPT-4.1 nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1471 | 1285 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1465 | 1260 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1474 | 1277 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 946 |
| WildBench | — | 81.2% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than GPT-4.1 nano?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 61.9 to 27.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-4.1 nano?
GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 5.5 lists at $2 and $10.
Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or GPT-4.1 nano better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.3 versus 24.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5.5 and GPT-4.1 nano share?
19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 32 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 nano has 38.