Head-to-head · frontier vs frontier

GPT-5.1 Reasoning vs o4 Reasoning: which model should you choose?

We compared GPT-5.1 Reasoning and o4 Reasoning on price, context window and 12 benchmarks. GPT-5.1 Reasoning has the stronger average benchmark score; GPT-5.1 Reasoning is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis.

OpenAI

GPT-5.1 Reasoning

GPT-5.1 Reasoning is a frontier model from OpenAI. It offers a 400,000-token context window, costs $20.27 per million input tokens and $82.11 per million output tokens, and averages 88.3 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$20.27 / 1M
Output
$82.11 / 1M
Context
400,000
Avg score
88.3
Open weights
No
Full GPT-5.1 Reasoning page
OpenAI

o4 Reasoning

o4 Reasoning is a frontier model from OpenAI. It offers a 1,000,000-token context window, costs $19.69 per million input tokens and $103.53 per million output tokens, and averages 87.5 across the index's benchmark suite.

Input
$19.69 / 1M
Output
$103.53 / 1M
Context
1,000,000
Avg score
87.5
Open weights
No
Full o4 Reasoning page

Specification comparison

SpecGPT-5.1 Reasoningo4 ReasoningEdge
Input price / 1M$20.27$19.69B
Output price / 1M$82.11$103.53A
Context window400,0001,000,000B
Max output128,000128,000Tie
Average score88.387.5A
Arena Elo1485.91472.2A
Open weightsNoNoTie

Benchmark comparison

GPT-5.1 Reasoning wins 9, o4 Reasoning wins 3, and 0 benchmarks are tied. The table shows the modelled score for each model and the gap.

BenchmarkGPT-5.1 Reasoningo4 ReasoningGapWinner
MMLU-Pro90.086.13.9GPT-5.1 Reasoning
GPQA Diamond85.684.01.6GPT-5.1 Reasoning
SWE-bench Verified76.076.40.4o4 Reasoning
HumanEval92.990.22.7GPT-5.1 Reasoning
MATH-50095.994.81.1GPT-5.1 Reasoning
AIME 202585.090.35.3o4 Reasoning
LiveCodeBench80.983.42.5o4 Reasoning
IFEval94.694.50.1GPT-5.1 Reasoning
TruthfulQA90.089.01.0GPT-5.1 Reasoning
HellaSwag94.492.42.0GPT-5.1 Reasoning
MMMU86.281.84.4GPT-5.1 Reasoning
Arena Elo1485.91472.213.7GPT-5.1 Reasoning

Price analysis

On a blended 3:1 input-to-output basis, GPT-5.1 Reasoning costs about $35.73 per million tokens and o4 Reasoning costs about $40.65. GPT-5.1 Reasoning is roughly 12% cheaper than o4 Reasoning. At high volume, that gap compounds quickly, so price should carry real weight unless the quality difference is decisive.

o4 Reasoning has the larger context window at 1,000,000 tokens, compared with 400,000 for GPT-5.1 Reasoning. That matters for long documents, large codebases and multi-step agent traces.

Verdict

Across 12 shared benchmarks, GPT-5.1 Reasoning wins 9, o4 Reasoning wins 3, and 0 are tied. On the index average, GPT-5.1 Reasoning leads o4 Reasoning by 0.8 points (88.3 versus 87.5).

The price picture favours GPT-5.1 Reasoning. The context picture favours o4 Reasoning. 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-5.1 Reasoning for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Choose GPT-5.1 Reasoning if

  • You want the higher average benchmark score in this index.
  • Unit cost matters and you want the cheaper blended price.

Choose o4 Reasoning if

  • You need the larger 1,000,000-token context window.

FAQ

Is GPT-5.1 Reasoning better than o4 Reasoning?

On the index average, GPT-5.1 Reasoning leads o4 Reasoning by 0.8 points (88.3 versus 87.5). The better choice depends on price, context and your task. GPT-5.1 Reasoning wins 9 benchmarks, o4 Reasoning wins 3.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.1 Reasoning or o4 Reasoning?

GPT-5.1 Reasoning is cheaper on a blended 3:1 basis at about $35.73 per million tokens, versus $40.65 for o4 Reasoning.

Which has the larger context window?

o4 Reasoning has the larger context window at 1,000,000 tokens. GPT-5.1 Reasoning has 400,000 tokens.

Are these models open weights?

GPT-5.1 Reasoning is proprietary; o4 Reasoning is proprietary.

Which should I choose for production?

If you need a single default, start with GPT-5.1 Reasoning for quality-sensitive work, and check whether its price holds at your expected volume before committing.

Related comparisons