Model comparison
GPT-4.1 mini vs Grok 4.3
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 mini costs 2.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 mini scores higher in 3 categories and Grok 4.3 in 7 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Grok 4.3 leads 35.9 to 10.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 44.7% for GPT-4.1 mini and 93.3% for Grok 4.3.
- GPT-4.1 mini is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $2.50 for Grok 4.3.
- GPT-4.1 mini accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | xAI |
| Noometry Index | 33.6 | 43.8 |
| Released | 2025-04-14 | 2026-04-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1M |
| Max output | 33K | 30K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.40 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.60 | $2.50 |
| Results tracked | 47 | 40 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Grok 4.3 leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 30.6 (#293), Grok 4.3: 41.6 (#121)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 40.4% | 47.3% |
| WeirdML | 37.6% | 49.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1367 | 1415 |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 23.9% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | 32.4% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1357 |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 48.9% | — |
| CadEval | 16% | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 944.17 |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-4.1 mini leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 33.3 (#55), Grok 4.3: 27.7 (#99)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 50.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 8% |
| LMArena Search | — | 1165 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 35.26 |
Reasoning Grok 4.3 leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 10.8 (#340), Grok 4.3: 35.9 (#68)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 8% |
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | 25% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1349 | 1396 |
| DTBench | 68.8% | 90.7% |
| LMCA | 21.1% | 38.3% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 135.01 | 149.16 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 48.6% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 55.2% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 3.5% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 7% | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 60.3 |
Math Grok 4.3 leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 24.1 (#270), Grok 4.3: 46.0 (#74)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 6.7% | 42.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 44.7% | 93.3% |
| LMArena Math | 1343 | 1388 |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 14.6% |
| ProofBench | — | 11% |
| Omni-MATH | 49.1% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 87.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 4.5% | — |
Knowledge Grok 4.3 leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#194), Grok 4.3: 52.5 (#62)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 65.8% | 88.8% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 12.7% | 33.2% |
| LMArena Expert | 1338 | 1385 |
| MMLU-Pro | 78.3% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 61.4% | — |
Multimodal GPT-4.1 mini leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 35.8 (#82), Grok 4.3: 31.6 (#104)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1181 | 1229 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | — | 0% |
Multilingual Grok 4.3 leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 45.7 (#166), Grok 4.3: 50.5 (#120)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1318 | 1385 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1329 | 1422 |
| LMArena French | 1358 | 1412 |
| LMArena German | 1351 | 1395 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1290 | 1379 |
| LMArena Korean | 1298 | 1356 |
| LMArena Russian | 1324 | 1399 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1319 | 1398 |
Instruction Following GPT-4.1 mini leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 73.7 (#118), Grok 4.3: 72.1 (#140)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1333 | 1366 |
| IFEval | 90.4% | — |
Long Context Grok 4.3 leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#275), Grok 4.3: 42.5 (#123)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1344 | 1393 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | 44.4% | — |
Writing & Preference Grok 4.3 leads
GPT-4.1 mini: 48.6 (#199), Grok 4.3: 58.5 (#118)
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 mini | Grok 4.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1340 | 1397 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1300 | 1380 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1354 | 1406 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1147 | — |
| WildBench | 83.8% | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1075 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-4.1 mini better than Grok 4.3?
Grok 4.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 43.8 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 mini costs 2.2× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Grok 4.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 mini or Grok 4.3?
GPT-4.1 mini is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $1.60 per million output tokens; Grok 4.3 lists at $1.25 and $2.50.
Is GPT-4.1 mini or Grok 4.3 better for coding?
Grok 4.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 41.6 versus 30.6 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 GPT-4.1 mini and Grok 4.3 share?
29 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 mini has 47 scored results on Noometry and Grok 4.3 has 40.