Model comparison

GPT-4.1 mini vs GPT-5.2

Data verified July 22, 2026

Head-to-head evidence from 15 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

GPT-4.1 mini

OpenAI

44.19/100

Margin

14.2pts

winning →

GPT-5.2

OpenAI

58.43/100

0 category wins3 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 mini #152 (Estimated); GPT-5.2 #64 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 mini and GPT-5.2 share 15 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 7 results are unique to GPT-4.1 mini; 13 to GPT-5.2.

Updated July 22, 2026

Shared results: 15
GPT-4.1 mini only: 7
GPT-5.2 only: 13
Comparable categories: 3 / 8

Pick GPT-5.2 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.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 15 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

GPT-5.2 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 58.43 to 44.19. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

GPT-5.2's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 70.6 against 23.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Verified, 23.6% to 80%.

GPT-5.2 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $1.75 input / $14.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.40 input / $1.60 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 mini. That is roughly 8.8x on output cost alone. GPT-5.2 is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 mini is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. GPT-4.1 mini gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 400K for GPT-5.2.

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 mini and GPT-5.2
Category	GPT-4.1 mini	Δ	GPT-5.2
Coding	GPT-4.1 mini23.6	Margin→ 47.0	GPT-5.270.6
Math	GPT-4.1 mini4.5	Margin→ 30.7	GPT-5.235.2
Knowledge	GPT-4.1 mini64.2	Margin→ 28.2	GPT-5.292.4
Agentic	GPT-4.1 miniNot measured	MarginNo overlap	GPT-5.255.7
Reasoning	GPT-4.1 miniNot measured	MarginNo overlap	GPT-5.252.9
Multimodal	GPT-4.1 miniNot measured	MarginNo overlap	GPT-5.280.4
Inst. Following	GPT-4.1 mini88.5	MarginNo overlap	GPT-5.2Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

A · GPT-4.1 miniB · GPT-5.2

SWE-bench Verified
Coding
Source ↗
A 23.6%B 80%
Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 56.4
SWE-bench Verified: GPT-4.1 mini scored 23.6%; GPT-5.2 scored 80%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
Math
Source ↗
A 4.483%B 40.700%
Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 36.2
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-4.1 mini scored 4.483%; GPT-5.2 scored 40.700%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.
GPQA
Knowledge
Source ↗
A 64.2%B 92.4%
Winner: GPT-5.2Δ 28.2
GPQA: GPT-4.1 mini scored 64.2%; GPT-5.2 scored 92.4%. GPT-5.2 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

Metric	GPT-4.1 mini	GPT-5.2	Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens	GPT-4.1 mini$0.4 input / $1.6 output	GPT-5.2$1.75 input / $14 output	GPT-4.1 mini has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per second	GPT-4.1 mini80 tok/s	GPT-5.273 tok/s	GPT-4.1 mini has the higher measured throughput.
First-answer latencyseconds to first token	GPT-4.1 mini0.76 s	GPT-5.2130.34 s	GPT-4.1 mini reaches the first token sooner.
Context windowmaximum listed tokens	GPT-4.1 mini1M	GPT-5.2400K	GPT-4.1 mini lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic

8 benchmarks

Benchmark	GPT-4.1 mini	GPT-5.2	Result
AA Agentic IndexSource	1.7%	—	Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource	52.9%	84.8%	GPT-5.2 leads
GDPval-AASource	0.1%	—	Not comparable
GDPval-AASource	503	—	Not comparable
BrowseCompSource	—	65.8%	Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource	—	47.3%	Not comparable
Gert LabsSource	—	46.54%	Not comparable
JobBenchSource	—	34.3%	Not comparable

CodingGPT-5.2 wins

5 benchmarks

Benchmark	GPT-4.1 mini	GPT-5.2	Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource	23.6%	80%	GPT-5.2 leads
AA Coding IndexSource	20.2%	—	Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource	40.4%	52.1%	GPT-5.2 leads
SWE-bench ProSource	—	55.6%	Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource	—	53.50%	Not comparable

Reasoning

3 benchmarks

Benchmark	GPT-4.1 mini	GPT-5.2	Result
AA-LCRSource	42.3%	72.7%	GPT-5.2 leads
CritPtSource	0.0%	11.6%	GPT-5.2 leads
ARC-AGI-2Source	—	52.9%	Not comparable

KnowledgeGPT-5.2 wins

8 benchmarks

Benchmark	GPT-4.1 mini	GPT-5.2	Result
MMLUSource	87.5%	—	Not comparable
GPQASource	64.2%	92.4%	GPT-5.2 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource	14.8%	42.2%	GPT-5.2 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource	66.4%	90.3%	GPT-5.2 leads
AA-HLESource	4.6%	35.4%	GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource	-50.1%	-1.0%	GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource	17.5%	43.8%	GPT-5.2 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource	82.0%	79.7%	GPT-5.2 leads

MathGPT-5.2 wins

3 benchmarks

Benchmark	GPT-4.1 mini	GPT-5.2	Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source	4.483%	40.700%	GPT-5.2 leads
AA AIME 2025Source	—	99.0%	Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source	—	18.800%	Not comparable

Multimodal

6 benchmarks

Benchmark	GPT-4.1 mini	GPT-5.2	Result
AA-MMMU-ProSource	58.7%	—	Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource	1027	1224	GPT-5.2 leads
MMMU-ProSource	—	79.5%	Not comparable
MathVisionSource	—	83.0%	Not comparable
CharXivSource	—	82.1%	Not comparable
V*Source	—	75.9%	Not comparable

Inst. Following

2 benchmarks

Benchmark	GPT-4.1 mini	GPT-5.2	Result
IFEvalSource	88.5%	—	Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource	38.3%	75.4%	GPT-5.2 leads

Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, GPT-4.1 mini or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 58.43 to 44.19. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Verified, where the scores are 23.6% and 80%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-4.1 mini or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.4 versus 64.2. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, GPT-4.1 mini or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 23.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Verified is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, GPT-4.1 mini or GPT-5.2?

GPT-5.2 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 35.2 versus 4.5. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

OpenAI Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings

Last updated: July 22, 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.