Head-to-head comparison across 1benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Claude Sonnet 4.5
66
GPT-4.1 nano
27
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 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.
Knowledge
+33.1 difference
Claude Sonnet 4.5
GPT-4.1 nano
$3 / $15
$0.1 / $0.4
N/A
181 t/s
N/A
0.63s
200K
1M
Pick Claude Sonnet 4.5 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.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 66 to 27. 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 knowledge, where it averages 83.4 against 50.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 83.4% to 50.3%.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 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 Sonnet 4.5.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 66 to 27. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 83.4% and 50.3%.
Claude Sonnet 4.5 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 83.4 versus 50.3. Inside this category, GPQA 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.