Head-to-head · multimodal vs multimodal

Claude 3.7 Sonnet vs GPT-4.1: which model should you choose?

We compared Claude 3.7 Sonnet and GPT-4.1 on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. GPT-4.1 has the stronger average benchmark score; GPT-4.1 is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.

Anthropic

Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is a multimodal model from Anthropic. It offers a 200,000-token context window, costs $14.91 per million input tokens and $74.27 per million output tokens, and averages 81.6 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$14.91 / 1M
Output
$74.27 / 1M
Context
200,000
Avg score
81.6
Open weights
No
Full Claude 3.7 Sonnet page
OpenAI

GPT-4.1

GPT-4.1 is a multimodal model from OpenAI. It offers a 1,000,000-token context window, costs $15.71 per million input tokens and $64.52 per million output tokens, and averages 82.4 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$15.71 / 1M
Output
$64.52 / 1M
Context
1,000,000
Avg score
82.4
Open weights
No
Full GPT-4.1 page

Specification comparison

SpecClaude 3.7 SonnetGPT-4.1Edge
Input price / 1M$14.91$15.71A
Output price / 1M$74.27$64.52B
Context window200,0001,000,000B
Max output128,00016,384A
Average score81.682.4B
Arena Elo1451.91432.4A
Open weightsNoNoTie

Benchmark comparison

Claude 3.7 Sonnet wins 4, GPT-4.1 wins 8, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkClaude 3.7 SonnetGPT-4.1GapWinner
MMLU-Pro83.586.22.7GPT-4.1
GPQA Diamond80.276.14.1Claude 3.7 Sonnet
SWE-bench Verified70.172.22.1GPT-4.1
HumanEval85.788.32.6GPT-4.1
MATH-50088.986.82.1Claude 3.7 Sonnet
AIME 202581.279.91.3Claude 3.7 Sonnet
LiveCodeBench75.077.82.8GPT-4.1
IFEval88.590.41.9GPT-4.1
TruthfulQA81.781.80.1GPT-4.1
HellaSwag87.690.32.7GPT-4.1
MMMU75.576.30.8GPT-4.1
Arena Elo1451.91432.419.5Claude 3.7 Sonnet

Price analysis

On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, Claude 3.7 Sonnet costs about $29.75 per million tokens and GPT-4.1 costs about $27.91. GPT-4.1 is roughly 6% cheaper than Claude 3.7 Sonnet. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.

GPT-4.1 has the larger context window at 1,000,000 tokens, compared with 200,000 for Claude 3.7 Sonnet. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.

Verdict

Across 12 shared benchmarks, Claude 3.7 Sonnet wins 4, GPT-4.1 wins 8, and 0 are tied. On the index average, GPT-4.1 leads Claude 3.7 Sonnet by 0.8 points (82.4 versus 81.6).

The price picture favours GPT-4.1. The context picture favours GPT-4.1. Those two dimensions often matter more than a few benchmark points once a model is good enough for the task.

If you need a single default, start with GPT-4.1 for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Choose Claude 3.7 Sonnet if

  • You need the larger 128,000-token output limit.

Choose GPT-4.1 if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.
  • You need the larger 1,000,000-token context window.
  • The workload needs multi-step reasoning.

FAQ

Is Claude 3.7 Sonnet better than GPT-4.1?

On the index average, GPT-4.1 leads Claude 3.7 Sonnet by 0.8 points (82.4 versus 81.6). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. Claude 3.7 Sonnet wins 4 benchmarks, GPT-4.1 wins 8.

Which is cheaper, Claude 3.7 Sonnet or GPT-4.1?

GPT-4.1 is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $27.91 per million tokens, versus $29.75 for Claude 3.7 Sonnet.

Which has the larger context window?

GPT-4.1 has the larger context window at 1,000,000 tokens. Claude 3.7 Sonnet has 200,000 tokens.

Are these models open weights?

Claude 3.7 Sonnet is proprietary; GPT-4.1 is proprietary.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with GPT-4.1 for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Related comparisons