Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
66
GPT-4.1 mini
46
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window.
Coding
+53.6 difference
Knowledge
+19.2 difference
Claude Sonnet 4.5
GPT-4.1 mini
$3 / $15
$0.4 / $1.6
N/A
80 t/s
N/A
0.76s
200K
1M
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 mini only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill or you need the larger 1M context window.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 66 to 46. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Sonnet 4.5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 77.2 against 23.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 77.2% to 23.6%.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $1.60 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 mini. That is roughly 9.4x on output cost alone. GPT-4.1 mini gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for Claude Sonnet 4.5.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 66 to 46. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 77.2% and 23.6%.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.4 versus 64.2. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 77.2 versus 23.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
For engineers, researchers, and the plain curious — a weekly brief on new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.