Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 nano vs GPT-4o

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

42.06/100
Margin
0.6pts
← winning
OpenAI
41.49/100
1 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 nano #161 (Estimated); GPT-4o #165 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 nano and GPT-4o share 13 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to GPT-4.1 nano; 0 to GPT-4o.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
13
GPT-4.1 nano only
8
GPT-4o only
0
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick GPT-4.1 nano if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4o only becomes the better choice if its workflow or ecosystem matters more than the raw scoreboard.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GPT-4.1 nano has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 42.06 versus 41.49. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

GPT-4.1 nano's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 1 against 0.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 1.034% to 0.345%.

GPT-4o is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.50 input / $10.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 nano. That is roughly 25.0x on output cost alone. GPT-4.1 nano gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for GPT-4o.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for GPT-4.1 nano and GPT-4o
CategoryGPT-4.1 nanoΔGPT-4o
MathGPT-4.1 nano1.0Margin 0.7GPT-4o0.3
KnowledgeGPT-4.1 nano50.3MarginNo overlapGPT-4oNot measured
Inst. FollowingGPT-4.1 nano83.2MarginNo overlapGPT-4oNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · GPT-4.1 nanoB · GPT-4o
  1. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 1.034%B 0.345%
    Winner: GPT-4.1 nanoΔ 0.7
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-4.1 nano scored 1.034%; GPT-4o scored 0.345%. GPT-4.1 nano wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4oComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-4.1 nano$0.1 input / $0.4 outputGPT-4o$2.5 input / $10 outputGPT-4.1 nano has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-4.1 nano181 tok/sGPT-4o131 tok/sGPT-4.1 nano has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-4.1 nano0.63 sGPT-4o0.81 sGPT-4.1 nano reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-4.1 nano1MGPT-4o128KGPT-4.1 nano lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4oResult
AA Agentic IndexSource 1.2%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 17.3%25.1%GPT-4o leads
GDPval-AASource 0.0%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 41Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4oResult
AA Coding IndexSource 11.1%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 25.9%33.3%GPT-4o leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4oResult
AA-LCRSource 17.0%0.0%GPT-4.1 nano leads
CritPtSource 0.0%0.0%Tie
Knowledge
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4oResult
MMLUSource 80.1%Not comparable
GPQASource 50.3%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 9.6%11.2%GPT-4o leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 51.2%54.3%GPT-4o leads
AA-HLESource 3.9%3.3%GPT-4.1 nano leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -56.4%-10.7%GPT-4o leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 13.3%19.7%GPT-4o leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.4%37.9%GPT-4o leads
MathGPT-4.1 nano wins
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4oResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 1.034%0.345%GPT-4.1 nano leads
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4oResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 40.1%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1003861GPT-4.1 nano leads
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoGPT-4oResult
IFEvalSource 83.2%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 32.0%34.3%GPT-4o leads
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GPT-4.1 nano or GPT-4o?

GPT-4.1 nano is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 42.06 to 41.49. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 1.034% and 0.345%.

Which is better for math, GPT-4.1 nano or GPT-4o?

GPT-4.1 nano has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 1 versus 0.3. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.