LLMBenchmark.ai

Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4.1 Nano vs GPT-5.6 Terra

Updated October 21, 2026. 58 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI
Coding
8.9
Overall
7.8
Output $/M
$0.40
0
GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI
Coding
69.0
Overall
42.1
Output $/M
$12.00
58
vs boards won of 58 shared

Decision reading

Pick GPT-5.6 Terra for coding: it scores 69.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 8.9 for GPT-4.1 Nano.

Pick GPT-4.1 Nano when output tokens cost 30.0x less.

Shared results
58
GPT-4.1 Nano only
11
GPT-5.6 Terra only
66
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-4.1 Nano 8.9 from 1 benchmark, GPT-5.6 Terra 69.0 from 2 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 69.0 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
ARC-AGI: GPT-4.1 Nano 0.0% against GPT-5.6 Terra 96.5%, 96.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4.1 Nano $0.40 against GPT-5.6 Terra $12.00 per million output tokens, 30.0x apart.
Context window
GPT-4.1 Nano takes 1.05M tokens, GPT-5.6 Terra 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-4.1 NanoBarsGPT-5.6 TerraTies
Coding06
Intelligence02
Agentic work01
Reasoning011
Math03
Knowledge010
Web design06
General019
All shared boards058
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index06
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
Aider polyglot8.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LiveBench codingNot measured86.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1522Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
AA Coding Index11.176.7GPT-5.6 Terra
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)42.7%85.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured95.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured22.7%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured74.6%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured47.8%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured87.6%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured77.5%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)Not measured14.8%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured58.9%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured72.1%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)32.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SciCodeNot measured55.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%62.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
FrontierCodeNot measured41.3%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
WeirdML19.0%78.3%GPT-5.6 Terra
ALE-BenchNot measured1951.4Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text: coding13061485GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: software and IT13051482GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1513Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1526Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1541Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.842.1GPT-5.6 Terra
Epoch Capabilities Index129.5160.1GPT-5.6 Terra
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured43.2Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1120Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1061Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1112Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1066Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1082Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1108Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1130Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveBench researchNot measured60.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveBench browserNot measured84.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured48.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured9.5%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured54.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured30.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured41.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured66.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured10.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
τ²-Bench Telecom17.3%86.3%GPT-5.6 Terra
APEX-AgentsNot measured58.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
BALROGNot measured53.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$7,343Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index011
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
GPQA Diamond50.8%90.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
LiveBench reasoningNot measured90.6%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)55.0%86.5%GPT-5.6 Terra
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)51.2%92.5%GPT-5.6 Terra
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)3.8%42.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)48.9%93.3%GPT-5.6 Terra
ARC-AGI0.0%96.5%GPT-5.6 Terra
ARC-AGI-20.0%83.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
SimpleBenchNot measured48.9%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Chess puzzles0.0%47.0%GPT-5.6 Terra
Mystery game puzzlesNot measured35.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12861469GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: expert12711496GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12931465GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Vision: diagramsNot measured1295Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: homeworkNot measured1312Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
AIME26.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)80.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MGSM (Vals AI)69.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AA Math Index24.0Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)24.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME28.9%99.7%GPT-5.6 Terra
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3Not measured86.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
FrontierMath, tier 4Not measured70.7%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
ProofBenchNot measured74.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
MATH level 570.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
LMArena Text: math12741465GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: mathematical work12741478GPT-5.6 Terra
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index010
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
MMLU Pro63.5%86.7%GPT-5.6 Terra
LegalBench (Vals AI)61.1%85.1%GPT-5.6 Terra
CorpFin (Vals AI)42.1%65.3%GPT-5.6 Terra
TaxEval (Vals AI)60.8%76.2%GPT-5.6 Terra
MortgageTax (Vals AI)52.8%67.3%GPT-5.6 Terra
MedQA (Vals AI)68.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured43.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)65.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
SimpleQA Verified6.0%43.2%GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: science12971452GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12761430GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: legal and government13001461GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: business and finance12671448GPT-5.6 Terra
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
Design Arena: websites9731269GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: UI components9161259GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: game dev9711230GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: data viz8911240GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: 3D9251135GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: all code categories9631241GPT-5.6 Terra
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1220Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1177Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LiveBench designNot measured76.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index019
General benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured79.3%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured62.4%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
SAGE (Vals AI)Not measured47.0%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured82.9%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured65.1%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
IFBench32.0%71.2%GPT-5.6 Terra
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)20.3%83.0%GPT-5.6 Terra
DTBench52.5%93.3%GPT-5.6 Terra
LMCA5.5%54.9%GPT-5.6 Terra
Fiction.LiveBench25.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 Nano measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured83.8%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Furniture assemblyNot measured54.2%Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text12851448GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: instruction following12661456GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: creative writing12601413GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Vision10631271GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: English13031449GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: non-English12601441GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: Chinese12701514GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: German12881460GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: Japanese11981454GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1427Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text: FrenchNot measured1466Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1451Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text: Russian12611452GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: PolishNot measured1446Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn12771453GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: longer queries12831454GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: writing and language12611431GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12431418GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Vision: English11011272GPT-5.6 Terra
LMArena Vision: ChineseNot measured1337Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: reading textNot measured1278Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: humorNot measured1236Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena Vision: creative writingNot measured1248Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
LMArena DocumentNot measured1472Only GPT-5.6 Terra measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
BenchmarkGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-5.6 TerraLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0003Fits in one request
GPT-5.6 Terra$0.0080Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.0062Fits in one request
GPT-5.6 Terra$0.136Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4.1 Nano$0.024Fits in one request
GPT-5.6 Terra$0.520Fits in one request

GPT-4.1 Nano costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-5.6 Terra
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4.1 NanoOpenAI GPT-5.6 Terra
MakerOpenAIOpenAI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 14, 2025July 9, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.10$2.00
Output $/Mtok$0.40$12.00
Coding index8.969.0
Independent measurements behind it12
Cost per solved taskNot computable$0.42
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4.1 Nano better than GPT-5.6 Terra for coding?

Pick GPT-5.6 Terra for coding: it scores 69.0 on the Vibe Coding Index against 8.9 for GPT-4.1 Nano. Pick GPT-4.1 Nano when output tokens cost 30.0x less.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 Nano or GPT-5.6 Terra?

GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; GPT-5.6 Terra costs $2.00 and $12.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.6 Terra only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4.1 Nano or GPT-5.6 Terra?

GPT-5.6 Terra, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4.1 Nano vs GPT-5.6 Terra comparison based on?

58 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4.1 Nano's coding index rests on 1 independent benchmark and GPT-5.6 Terra's on 2. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next