Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-4.1

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 37 shared benchmarks.

Claude Opus 4.8 Anthropic

60.7

Rank #13 Confirmed

GPT-4.1 OpenAI

35.9

Rank #219 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 37 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher in 10 categories and GPT-4.1 in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Opus 4.8 leads 78.4 to 22.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 92.5% for Claude Opus 4.8 and 5.5% for GPT-4.1.
  • GPT-4.1 is cheaper at $2 / $8 per million input/output tokens, against $5 / $25 for Claude Opus 4.8.
  • GPT-4.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index60.735.9
Released2026-05-282025-04-14
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$5$2
Output $ / M tokens$25$8
Results tracked6552

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 59.9 (#12), GPT-4.1: 34.4 (#238)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
WeirdML82.9%39%
LMArena Coding14901391
ALE-Bench1,564558.1
SWE-bench Verified—48.5%
DeepSWE59%—
FrontierCode46.5%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—39.6%
Aider Polyglot—52.4%
LMArena WebDev1556—
SciCode53.5%—
GSO47.1%—
CadEval—42%

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 47.6 (#11), GPT-4.1: 34.7 (#43)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
APEX-Agents48.9%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—54%
OSWorld 2.020.6%—
Remote Labor Index8.3%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
DeepResearch Bench50.2%—
PostTrainBench33.8%—
GBAEval70.9%—
GDP.pdf24%—
LMArena Search1204—
Vending-Bench 25,787—

Reasoning Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 64.7 (#16), GPT-4.1: 11.7 (#339)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
ARC-AGI-272.1%0.4%
SimpleBench64.8%27%
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%52.3%
ARC-AGI-192.5%5.5%
Chess Puzzles34%6%
EnigmaEval23.5%2.2%
LMArena Hard Prompts14821384
DTBench94.9%68.3%
LMCA57.5%25.6%
Epoch Capabilities Index158.21136.78
ForecastBench59.961.5
NYT Connections (extended)91.1%—
CritPt20.9%—
EBR-Bench28.6%—
Mystery Game Puzzles36%—
Surface Evolver Bench87.5%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—

Math Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 78.4 (#13), GPT-4.1: 22.3 (#280)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)80%6%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202598.3%38.3%
LMArena Math14871370
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)47.2%5.5%
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)31.3%0%
FrontierMath Tier 456.1%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions91.8%—
ProofBench69%—
Omni-MATH—47.1%
MATH Level 5—83%

Knowledge Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 61.3 (#29), GPT-4.1: 37.1 (#160)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
GPQA Diamond91%66.9%
SimpleQA Verified53%31.1%
LMArena Expert15021364
Humanity's Last Exam—5.4%
MMLU-Pro—81.1%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.6%
GPQA (HELM)—65.9%

Multimodal Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 42.9 (#26), GPT-4.1: 38.2 (#67)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Vision12941211
GeoBench—72%
Blueprint-Bench 214.5%—
Furniture Assembly42.5%—
LMArena Document1475—

Multilingual Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 55.2 (#33), GPT-4.1: 49.4 (#133)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Non-English14501370
LMArena Chinese15071382
LMArena French14811382
LMArena German14721381
LMArena Japanese14401319
LMArena Korean14321339
LMArena Russian14741377
LMArena Spanish14661376

Instruction Following Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 77.4 (#24), GPT-4.1: 71.3 (#153)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Instruction Following14761367
IFEval—83.8%

Long Context Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 45.4 (#35), GPT-4.1: 40.0 (#163)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Longer Query14831385
Fiction.LiveBench—63.9%

Writing & Preference Claude Opus 4.8 leads

Claude Opus 4.8: 72.0 (#16), GPT-4.1: 57.6 (#125)

BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8GPT-4.1
LMArena Text14611383
LMArena Creative Writing14541363
EQ-Bench Creative Writing18401420
LMArena Multi-Turn14761398
WildBench—85.4%
EQ-Bench 41281—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than GPT-4.1?

Claude Opus 4.8 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.7 to 35.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-4.1 costs 2.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Opus 4.8's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4.1?

GPT-4.1 is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $8 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.8 lists at $5 and $25.

Is Claude Opus 4.8 or GPT-4.1 better for coding?

Claude Opus 4.8 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 59.9 versus 34.4 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

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

How many benchmarks do Claude Opus 4.8 and GPT-4.1 share?

37 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Opus 4.8 has 65 scored results on Noometry and GPT-4.1 has 52.

Related comparisons

Go deeper