Model comparison
GPT-4.1 vs LFM2.5-8B-A1B
Head-to-head evidence from 13 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
BenchAlign evidence: GPT-4.1 supported; LFM2.5-8B-A1B estimated. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. GPT-4.1 and LFM2.5-8B-A1B share 13 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 8 results are unique to GPT-4.1; 5 to LFM2.5-8B-A1B.
Updated July 16, 2026- Shared results
- 13
- GPT-4.1 only
- 8
- LFM2.5-8B-A1B only
- 5
- Comparable categories
- 2 / 8
Pick GPT-4.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. LFM2.5-8B-A1B only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 13 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 2 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 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 56 to 37. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
GPT-4.1's sharpest advantage is in instruction following, where it averages 87.4 against 68.8. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is IFEval, 87.4% to 91.8%. LFM2.5-8B-A1B does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
GPT-4.1 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $2.00 input / $8.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $0.00 input / $0.00 output per 1M tokens for LFM2.5-8B-A1B. That is roughly Infinityx on output cost alone. LFM2.5-8B-A1B is the reasoning model in the pair, while GPT-4.1 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 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 128K for LFM2.5-8B-A1B.
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 | Δ | LFM2.5-8B-A1B |
|---|---|---|---|
| Math | GPT-4.14.1 | Margin→ 45.9 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B50.0 |
| Inst. Following | GPT-4.187.4 | Margin← 18.6 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B68.8 |
| Coding | GPT-4.154.6 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured |
| Knowledge | GPT-4.166.3 | MarginNo overlap | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
IFEval
Inst. FollowingA 87.4%B 91.8%Winner: LFM2.5-8B-A1BΔ 4.4IFEval: GPT-4.1 scored 87.4%; LFM2.5-8B-A1B scored 91.8%. LFM2.5-8B-A1B wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | GPT-4.1 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | GPT-4.1$2 input / $8 output | LFM2.5-8B-A1B$0 input / $0 output | LFM2.5-8B-A1B has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | GPT-4.1108 tok/s | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | GPT-4.11.02 s | LFM2.5-8B-A1BNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | GPT-4.11M | LFM2.5-8B-A1B128K | GPT-4.1 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic3 benchmarks
Coding3 benchmarks
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | GPT-4.1 | LFM2.5-8B-A1B | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLUSource | 90.2% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQASource | 66.3% | — | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 19.4% | 8.3% | GPT-4.1 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 66.6% | 51.3% | GPT-4.1 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 4.6% | 6.9% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | -36.2% | -33.3% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | 24.2% | 9.4% | GPT-4.1 leads |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | 79.6% | 47.0% | LFM2.5-8B-A1B leads |
MathLFM2.5-8B-A1B wins5 benchmarks
Multimodal2 benchmarks
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Which is better, GPT-4.1 or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
GPT-4.1 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 56 to 37. The biggest single separator in this matchup is IFEval, where the scores are 87.4% and 91.8%.
Which is better for math, GPT-4.1 or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
LFM2.5-8B-A1B has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 50 versus 4.1. GPT-4.1 stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for instruction following, GPT-4.1 or LFM2.5-8B-A1B?
GPT-4.1 has the edge for instruction following in this comparison, averaging 87.4 versus 68.8. Inside this category, AA-IFBench is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.