# Claude Opus 4.1 vs GPT-4.1 mini

> Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 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 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-opus-4-1-vs-gpt-4-1-mini
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 27

## Summary

- They share 27 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher in 8 categories and GPT-4.1 mini in 2 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.1 leads 32.2 to 10.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 68.9% for Claude Opus 4.1 and 44.7% 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 4.1.
- GPT-4.1 mini accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Noometry Index | 41.0 | 33.6 |
| Rank | 142 | 240 |
| Context | 200K | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $15 | $0.40 |
| Output $/M | $75 | $1.60 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 30.6 (#293)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 45.9% | 37.6% |
| LMArena Coding | 1479 | 1367 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.3% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 23.9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 32.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1390 | — |
| SciCode | — | 40.4% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 48.9% |
| CadEval | — | 16% |
| ALE-Bench | 674.77 | — |
| AlgoTune | 1.34 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 33.3 (#55)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 38% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 50.5% |
| GDPval | 43.6% | — |
| Cybench | 42% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 48.3% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1148 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 66.8% | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 10.8 (#340)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 7% | 7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1443 | 1349 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 21% | 7% |
| DTBench | 80% | 68.8% |
| LMCA | 37.1% | 21.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 144.12 | 135.01 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | — | 0% |
| SimpleBench | 60% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 48.6% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | — | 3.5% |
| CritPt | — | 0% |
| EnigmaEval | 7.2% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 7.9% | — |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |

## Math

- Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 24.1 (#270)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 12.6% | 6.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 68.9% | 44.7% |
| LMArena Math | 1431 | 1343 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 7.2% | 4.5% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 2.4% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 49.1% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 87.3% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 4.2% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#194)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 77.3% | 65.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1439 | 1338 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 11.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 12.7% |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 78.3% |
| Confabulations | 17.1% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 11.8% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 61.4% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 35.8 (#82)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1181 |
| VPCT | 35% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 45.7 (#166)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1405 | 1318 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1427 | 1329 |
| LMArena French | 1431 | 1358 |
| LMArena German | 1413 | 1351 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1378 | 1290 |
| LMArena Korean | 1380 | 1298 |
| LMArena Russian | 1422 | 1324 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1448 | 1319 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 73.7 (#118)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1435 | 1333 |
| IFEval | — | 90.4% |

## Long Context

- Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#275)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1455 | 1344 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 44.4% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74)
- GPT-4.1 mini: 48.6 (#199)

| Benchmark | Claude Opus 4.1 | GPT-4.1 mini |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1419 | 1340 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1412 | 1300 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1444 | 1354 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | 84.7% | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1147 |
| WildBench | — | 83.8% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Opus 4.1 better than GPT-4.1 mini?

Claude Opus 4.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 41.0 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 4.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.1 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 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.

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

Claude Opus 4.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 44.4 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 4.1 and GPT-4.1 mini share?

27 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.1 has 48 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 mini has 47.