Side-by-side benchmark comparison across knowledge, coding, math, and reasoning.
Llama 3.1 405B is clearly ahead on the aggregate, 65 to 23. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Llama 3.1 405B's sharpest advantage is in mathematics, where it averages 70.6 against 9.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is AIME 2024, 72 to 9.8. GPT-4.1 nano does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-4.1 nano gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for Llama 3.1 405B.
Pick Llama 3.1 405B if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-4.1 nano only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.
Llama 3.1 405B
58.7
GPT-4.1 nano
65.2
Llama 3.1 405B
70.6
GPT-4.1 nano
9.8
Llama 3.1 405B
86
GPT-4.1 nano
83.2
Llama 3.1 405B is ahead overall, 65 to 23. The biggest single separator in this matchup is AIME 2024, where the scores are 72 and 9.8.
GPT-4.1 nano has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 65.2 versus 58.7. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Llama 3.1 405B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 70.6 versus 9.8. Inside this category, AIME 2024 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Llama 3.1 405B has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 86 versus 83.2. 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.