Skip to main content

Model comparison

GPT-4.1 nano vs o1-pro

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 2 shared benchmark results across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

41.1/100
Margin
3.9pts
winning →
OpenAI
45/100
0 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: GPT-4.1 nano #170 (Estimated); o1-pro #148 (Estimated). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 nano and o1-pro share 2 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 19 results are unique to GPT-4.1 nano; 0 to o1-pro.

Updated July 28, 2026
Shared results
2
GPT-4.1 nano only
19
o1-pro only
0
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick o1-pro 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.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 2 shared benchmark results across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

o1-pro is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 45 to 41.1. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

o1-pro's sharpest advantage is in knowledge, where it averages 79 against 50.3. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is GPQA, 50.3% to 79%.

o1-pro is also the more expensive model on tokens at $150.00 input / $600.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.10 input / $0.40 output per 1M tokens for GPT-4.1 nano. That is roughly 1500.0x on output cost alone. o1-pro is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 nano 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 nano gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 200K for o1-pro.

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 nano and o1-pro
CategoryGPT-4.1 nanoΔo1-pro
KnowledgeGPT-4.1 nano50.3Margin 28.7o1-pro79.0
MathGPT-4.1 nano1.0MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured
Inst. FollowingGPT-4.1 nano83.2MarginNo overlapo1-proNot measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · GPT-4.1 nanoB · o1-pro
  1. GPQA

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 50.3%B 79%
    Winner: o1-proΔ 28.7
    GPQA: GPT-4.1 nano scored 50.3%; o1-pro scored 79%. o1-pro wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricGPT-4.1 nanoo1-proComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensGPT-4.1 nano$0.1 input / $0.4 outputo1-pro$150 input / $600 outputGPT-4.1 nano has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondGPT-4.1 nano181 tok/so1-proNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenGPT-4.1 nano0.63 so1-proNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensGPT-4.1 nano1Mo1-pro200KGPT-4.1 nano lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoo1-proResult
AA Agentic IndexSource 1.2%Not comparable
τ²-bench resultsSource 17.3%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 0.0%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 63Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoo1-proResult
AA Coding IndexSource 11.1%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 25.9%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoo1-proResult
AA-LCRSource 17.0%Not comparable
CritPtSource 0.0%Not comparable
Knowledgeo1-pro wins
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoo1-proResult
MMLUSource 80.1%Not comparable
GPQASource 50.3%79%o1-pro leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 9.6%18.9%o1-pro leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 51.2%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 3.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -56.4%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 13.3%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 80.4%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoo1-proResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 1.034%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoo1-proResult
AA-MMMU-ProSource 40.1%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 998Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 nanoo1-proResult
IFEvalSource 83.2%Not comparable
AA-IFBenchSource 32.0%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, GPT-4.1 nano or o1-pro?

o1-pro is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 45 to 41.1. The biggest single separator in this matchup is GPQA, where the scores are 50.3% and 79%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, GPT-4.1 nano or o1-pro?

o1-pro has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 79 versus 50.3. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 28, 2026

Know when it’s worth switching models

The model to choose, the cheaper alternative, and the release we would wait on.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.