Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.6 vs GPT-4.1 mini

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 mini costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 34 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.6 Anthropic

58.2

Rank #20 Confirmed

GPT-4.1 mini OpenAI

33.6

Rank #240 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher in 10 categories and GPT-4.1 mini in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Opus 4.6 leads 57.8 to 10.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 94% for Claude Opus 4.6 and 3.5% for GPT-4.1 mini.
  • GPT-4.1 mini is cheaper at $0.40 / $1.60 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.6.
  • GPT-4.1 mini accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index58.233.6
Released2026-02-042025-04-14
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$5$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$25$1.60
Results tracked6847

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20), GPT-4.1 mini: 30.6 (#293)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)75.6%23.9%
WeirdML78%37.6%
LMArena Coding15361367
SWE-bench Verified78.7%—
FrontierCode26.6%—
Aider Polyglot—32.4%
LMArena WebDev1547—
SWE-bench Multilingual72%—
SciCode—40.4%
GSO41.2%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—48.9%
CadEval—16%
ALE-Bench996.5—
AlgoTune1.47—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4), GPT-4.1 mini: 33.3 (#55)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
Terminal-Bench79.8%—
APEX-Agents46.3%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—50.5%
Remote Labor Index4.2%—
τ²-bench Banking27.3%—
Cybench93%—
DeepResearch Bench55.3%—
GBAEval44.1%—
LMArena Search1253—
METR Time Horizons78.9%—
Vending-Bench 28,018—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23), GPT-4.1 mini: 10.8 (#340)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
ARC-AGI-269.2%0%
Kagi LLM Benchmark83.6%48.6%
ARC-AGI-194%3.5%
Chess Puzzles17%7%
LMArena Hard Prompts15271349
Mystery Game Puzzles25%7%
DTBench91.2%68.8%
LMCA55.8%21.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.24135.01
SimpleBench67.6%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.1%—
CritPt—0%
EnigmaEval7.6%—
Thematic Generalization80.6%—
EBR-Bench12.7%—
ForecastBench60—

Math Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31), GPT-4.1 mini: 24.1 (#270)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)66%6.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202594.4%44.7%
LMArena Math15191343
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)40.7%4.5%
FrontierMath Tier 426.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions78.5%—
ProofBench50%—
Omni-MATH—49.1%
MATH Level 5—87.3%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)22.9%—

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26), GPT-4.1 mini: 34.7 (#194)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
GPQA Diamond90.5%65.8%
SimpleQA Verified47%12.7%
LMArena Expert15461338
Humanity's Last Exam34.4%—
MMLU-Pro—78.3%
Vectara Hallucination Rate12.2%—
GPQA (HELM)—61.4%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74), GPT-4.1 mini: 35.8 (#82)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Vision13161181
Furniture Assembly28.3%—
LMArena Document1507—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6), GPT-4.1 mini: 45.7 (#166)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Non-English14891318
LMArena Chinese15511329
LMArena French15131358
LMArena German15021351
LMArena Japanese14841290
LMArena Korean14641298
LMArena Russian14971324
LMArena Spanish15101319

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4), GPT-4.1 mini: 73.7 (#118)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Instruction Following15231333
IFEval—90.4%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13), GPT-4.1 mini: 31.8 (#275)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Longer Query15201344
Fiction.LiveBench—44.4%
CL-bench20.7%—
CL-bench Life17%—

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.6 leads

Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10), GPT-4.1 mini: 48.6 (#199)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.6GPT-4.1 mini
LMArena Text15031340
LMArena Creative Writing15051300
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18091147
LMArena Multi-Turn15131354
WildBench—83.8%
EQ-Bench 41223—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.6 better than GPT-4.1 mini?

Claude Opus 4.6 is the stronger model overall, scoring 58.2 to 33.6 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 mini costs 14× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.6's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.6 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 4.6 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.6 or GPT-4.1 mini better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.6 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 57.2 versus 30.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

GPT-4.1 mini does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.6 and GPT-4.1 mini share?

34 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.6 has 68 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 mini has 47.

Related comparisons

Go deeper