# GPT-4.1 nano vs Step 3.7 Flash

> Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.5 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Step 3.7 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-4-1-nano-vs-step-3-7-flash
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 2

## Summary

- They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-4.1 nano scores higher in 0 categories and Step 3.7 Flash in 3 categories; 3 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in coding, where Step 3.7 Flash leads 39.4 to 23.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 25.9% for GPT-4.1 nano and 40% for Step 3.7 Flash.
- GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $0.18 / $1.11 for Step 3.7 Flash.
- GPT-4.1 nano accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 256K.
- Step 3.7 Flash has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | StepFun |
| Noometry Index | 27.7 | 36.5 |
| Rank | 322 | 207 |
| Context | 1.05M | 256K |
| Input $/M | $0.10 | $0.18 |
| Output $/M | $0.40 | $1.11 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |

## Coding

- GPT-4.1 nano: 23.8 (#325)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 39.4 (#147)

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 25.9% | 40% |
| Aider Polyglot | 8.9% | — |
| WeirdML | 19% | — |
| LMArena Coding | 1306 | — |
| ALE-Bench | — | 694.12 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-4.1 nano: 26.3 (#98)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 33% | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-4.1 nano: 8.6 (#344)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 20.9 (#211)

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 2.3% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 0% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 33.3% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 39.7% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 0% | — |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1286 | — |
| DTBench | 52.5% | — |
| LMCA | 5.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 129.62 | — |

## Math

- GPT-4.1 nano: 25.5 (#246)
- Step 3.7 Flash: 40.9 (#74)

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 68.5% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 28.9% | — |
| Omni-MATH | 36.7% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1274 | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 70% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 1% | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-4.1 nano: 21.8 (#268)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 48.9% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 6% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | 55% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 50.7% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1272 | — |

## Multimodal

- GPT-4.1 nano: 28.6 (#108)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1063 | — |

## Multilingual

- GPT-4.1 nano: 41.8 (#200)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1260 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1270 | — |
| LMArena German | 1288 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1199 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1261 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-4.1 nano: 68.0 (#188)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| IFEval | 84.3% | — |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1267 | — |

## Long Context

- GPT-4.1 nano: 23.7 (#291)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Fiction.LiveBench | 25% | — |
| LMArena Longer Query | 1283 | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-4.1 nano: 40.7 (#238)
- Step 3.7 Flash: —

| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Step 3.7 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1285 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1260 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 946 | — |
| WildBench | 81.2% | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1277 | — |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-4.1 nano better than Step 3.7 Flash?

Step 3.7 Flash is the stronger model overall, scoring 36.5 to 27.7 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 nano costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Step 3.7 Flash's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or Step 3.7 Flash?

GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Step 3.7 Flash lists at $0.18 and $1.11.

### Is GPT-4.1 nano or Step 3.7 Flash better for coding?

Step 3.7 Flash scores higher on coding benchmarks: 39.4 versus 23.8 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 nano does, with 1.05M tokens against 256K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-4.1 nano and Step 3.7 Flash share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-4.1 nano has 38 scored results on Noometry and Step 3.7 Flash has 5.