Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude 3.5 Sonnet vs GPT-4.1 nano

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

46.96/100
Margin
5.8pts
← winning
41.14/100
2 category wins0 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude 3.5 Sonnet #139 (Estimated); GPT-4.1 nano #170 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT-4.1 nano share 2 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 2 results are unique to Claude 3.5 Sonnet; 19 to GPT-4.1 nano.

Updated July 24, 2026
Shared results
2
Claude 3.5 Sonnet only
2
GPT-4.1 nano only
19
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick Claude 3.5 Sonnet if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 nano only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 46.96 to 41.14. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 59.4 against 50.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 59.4% to 50.3%.

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 nano. That is roughly 37.5x on output cost alone. GPT-4.1 nano gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude 3.5 Sonnet.

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 Claude 3.5 Sonnet and GPT-4.1 nano
CategoryClaude 3.5 SonnetΔGPT-4.1 nano
KnowledgeClaude 3.5 Sonnet59.4Margin 9.1GPT-4.1 nano50.3
MathClaude 3.5 Sonnet1.6Margin 0.6GPT-4.1 nano1.0
CodingClaude 3.5 Sonnet49.0MarginNo overlapGPT-4.1 nanoNot measured
Inst. FollowingClaude 3.5 SonnetNot measuredMarginNo overlapGPT-4.1 nano83.2

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Claude 3.5 SonnetB · GPT-4.1 nano
  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 59.4%B 50.3%
    Winner: Claude 3.5 SonnetΔ 9.1
    GPQA: Claude 3.5 Sonnet scored 59.4%; GPT-4.1 nano scored 50.3%. Claude 3.5 Sonnet wins this benchmark.
  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 2.069%B 1.034%
    Winner: Claude 3.5 SonnetΔ 1
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude 3.5 Sonnet scored 2.069%; GPT-4.1 nano scored 1.034%. Claude 3.5 Sonnet wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricClaude 3.5 SonnetGPT-4.1 nanoComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude 3.5 Sonnet$3 input / $15 outputGPT-4.1 nano$0.1 input / $0.4 outputGPT-4.1 nano has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude 3.5 SonnetNot availableGPT-4.1 nano181 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude 3.5 SonnetNot availableGPT-4.1 nano0.63 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude 3.5 Sonnet200KGPT-4.1 nano1MGPT-4.1 nano lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGPT-4.1 nanoResult
AA Agentic IndexSource 1.2%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 17.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 0.0%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 63Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGPT-4.1 nanoResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 49%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 11.1%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 25.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGPT-4.1 nanoResult
AA-LCRSource 17.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
KnowledgeClaude 3.5 Sonnet wins
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGPT-4.1 nanoResult
GPQASource 59.4%50.3%Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
MMLUSource 80.1%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 9.6%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 51.2%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 3.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -56.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 13.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.4%Not comparable
MathClaude 3.5 Sonnet wins
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGPT-4.1 nanoResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 2.069%1.034%Claude 3.5 Sonnet leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 0.000%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGPT-4.1 nanoResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 40.1%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1003Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude 3.5 SonnetGPT-4.1 nanoResult
IFEvalSource 83.2%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 32.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or GPT-4.1 nano?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 46.96 to 41.14. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 59.4% and 50.3%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or GPT-4.1 nano?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 59.4 versus 50.3. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Claude 3.5 Sonnet or GPT-4.1 nano?

Claude 3.5 Sonnet has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 1.6 versus 1. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 24, 2026