Head-to-head comparison across 2benchmark categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
GPT-4.1 nano
42
LFM2.5-VL-450M
33
Pick GPT-4.1 nano if you want the stronger benchmark profile. LFM2.5-VL-450M only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Knowledge
+28.7 difference
Inst. Following
+22.0 difference
GPT-4.1 nano
LFM2.5-VL-450M
$0.1 / $0.4
$0 / $0
181 t/s
N/A
0.63s
N/A
1M
128K
Pick GPT-4.1 nano if you want the stronger benchmark profile. LFM2.5-VL-450M only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
GPT-4.1 nano is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 42 to 33. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-4.1 nano's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 50.3 against 21.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 50.3% to 25.7%.
GPT-4.1 nano is also the more expensive model on tokens at $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for LFM2.5-VL-450M. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. GPT-4.1 nano gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for LFM2.5-VL-450M.
GPT-4.1 nano is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 42 to 33. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 50.3% and 25.7%.
GPT-4.1 nano has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 50.3 versus 21.6. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
GPT-4.1 nano has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 83.2 versus 61.2. Inside this category, IFEval is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Get notified when new models drop, benchmark scores change, or the leaderboard shifts. One email per week.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime. We only store derived location metadata for consent routing.