Model comparison
GPT-4.1 nano vs Llama 4 Maverick
Head-to-head evidence from 18 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 nano #170 (Estimated); Llama 4 Maverick #201 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 nano and Llama 4 Maverick share 18 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 3 results are unique to GPT-4.1 nano; 0 to Llama 4 Maverick.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 18
- GPT-4.1 nano only
- 3
- Llama 4 Maverick only
- 0
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Pick GPT-4.1 nano if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Llama 4 Maverick only becomes the better choice if you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 18 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
GPT-4.1 nano is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 41.14 to 22.7. 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 mathematics, where it averages 1 against 0.7. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), 1.034% to 0.690%.
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 Llama 4 Maverick. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone.
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 | GPT-4.1 nano | Δ | Llama 4 Maverick |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-4.1 nano1.0 | Margin← 0.3 | Llama 4 Maverick0.7 |
| Knowledge | GPT-4.1 nano50.3 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 MaverickNot measured |
| Inst. Following | GPT-4.1 nano83.2 | MarginNo overlap | Llama 4 MaverickNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)
MathA 1.034%B 0.690%Winner: GPT-4.1 nanoΔ 0.3FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): GPT-4.1 nano scored 1.034%; Llama 4 Maverick scored 0.690%. GPT-4.1 nano wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-4.1 nano | Llama 4 Maverick | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-4.1 nano$0.1 input / $0.4 output | Llama 4 Maverick$0 input / $0 output | Llama 4 Maverick has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-4.1 nano181 tok/s | Llama 4 Maverick121 tok/s | GPT-4.1 nano has the higher measured throughput. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-4.1 nano0.63 s | Llama 4 Maverick0.95 s | GPT-4.1 nano reaches the first token sooner. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-4.1 nano1M | Llama 4 Maverick1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic4 benchmarks
Coding2 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLUSource | 80.1% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 50.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 9.6% | 14.3% | Llama 4 Maverick leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 51.2% | 67.1% | Llama 4 Maverick leads |
| AA-HLESource | 3.9% | 4.8% | Llama 4 Maverick leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -56.4% | -41.8% | Llama 4 Maverick leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 13.3% | 24.3% | Llama 4 Maverick leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 80.4% | 87.3% | GPT-4.1 nano leads |
MathGPT-4.1 nano wins1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 nano | Llama 4 Maverick | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source | 1.034% | 0.690% | GPT-4.1 nano leads |
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, GPT-4.1 nano or Llama 4 Maverick?
GPT-4.1 nano is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 41.14 to 22.7. The biggest single separator in this matchup is FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3), where the scores are 1.034% and 0.690%.
Which is better for math, GPT-4.1 nano or Llama 4 Maverick?
GPT-4.1 nano has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 1 versus 0.7. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Self-host vs API cost
Estimates at 50,000 req/day · 1000 tokens/req average.