Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4.1 vs MiniMax M2.1

MiniMax M2.1 leads GPT-4.1 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 20.9 to 12.7, and MiniMax M2.1 costs 6.7x less per output token ($1.20 vs $8.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 29 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4.1OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
36.5
Output $/M
$8.00
6
MiniMax M2.1MiniMax
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.20
23
vs boards won of 29 shared

GPT-4.1 or MiniMax M2.1: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4.1 for a lower cost per solved task ($0.37 against $0.59) and a larger context window (1.05M against 205K tokens).

Shared results
29
GPT-4.1 only
66
MiniMax M2.1 only
5
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

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 not benchmarked, MiniMax M2.1 not benchmarked.
Widest category
Agentic work, 38.3 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Math Index: GPT-4.1 34.7 against MiniMax M2.1 82.7, 48.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4.1 $8.00 against MiniMax M2.1 $1.20 per million output tokens, 6.7x apart.
Context window
GPT-4.1 takes 1.05M tokens, MiniMax M2.1 205K.

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-4.1BarsMiniMax M2.1Ties
Coding04
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning03
Math05
Knowledge52
Web design06
General11
All shared boards623
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index04
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
Aider polyglot52.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SWE-bench Verified39.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SWE-bench Multimodal31.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)54.7%81.8%MiniMax M2.1
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)Not measured74.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)45.7%81.0%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)13.6%28.8%MiniMax M2.1
Terminal-BenchNot measured36.6%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
WeirdML39.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ALE-Bench558.1623.8MiniMax M2.1
LMArena Text: coding1390Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1391Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SciCode4.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 30 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index12.720.9MiniMax M2.1
Epoch Capabilities Index136.7Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
τ²-Bench Telecom47.1%85.4%MiniMax M2.1
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)54.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
BrowseComp-Plus36.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
GPQA Diamond65.4%78.5%MiniMax M2.1
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)66.6%83.0%MiniMax M2.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%23.2%MiniMax M2.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)66.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ARC-AGI5.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ARC-AGI-20.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
SimpleBench27.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Chess puzzles3.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1384Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: expert1364Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1393Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: diagrams1215Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1248Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Math benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
AIME39.6%77.9%MiniMax M2.1
MATH 500 (Vals AI)87.2%89.0%MiniMax M2.1
MGSM (Vals AI)87.7%87.8%MiniMax M2.1
AA Math Index34.782.7MiniMax M2.1
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)34.7%82.7%MiniMax M2.1
OTIS Mock AIME38.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 36.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MATH level 583.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: math1369Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1360Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index52
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
MMLU Pro80.5%87.0%MiniMax M2.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.1%75.5%GPT-4.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)69.9%55.8%GPT-4.1
CorpFin (Vals AI)63.0%58.9%GPT-4.1
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.1%66.3%GPT-4.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)65.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)91.2%91.2%GPT-4.1
MedCode (Vals AI)Not measured34.1%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)80.6%87.5%MiniMax M2.1
SimpleQA Verified31.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
GeoBench72.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: science1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1379Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1399Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1369Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
FACTS Benchmark Suite45.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
PRBench Finance34.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
PRBench Legal36.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
Design Arena: websites10381201MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: UI components9981220MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: game dev10791134MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: data viz11041206MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: 3D8491164MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: all code categories10251190MiniMax M2.1
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1131Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
General benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
MedScribe (Vals AI)Not measured80.8%Only MiniMax M2.1 measured
IFBench43.0%69.9%MiniMax M2.1
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)68.3%67.7%GPT-4.1
DTBench68.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMCA25.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Fiction.LiveBench63.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text1383Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1367Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1363Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision1210Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: English1392Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: non-English1370Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Chinese1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: German1381Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1319Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1338Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: French1382Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Spanish1376Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Russian1377Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: Polish1389Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1397Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1385Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1371Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1365Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: English1209Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1226Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1218Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1196Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1207Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1208Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1210Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MultiChallenge39.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and MiniMax M2.1
BenchmarkGPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1Leader
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$0.0060Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.0009Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4.1$0.124Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.019Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4.1$0.480Fits in one request
MiniMax M2.1$0.072Exceeds the context window

MiniMax M2.1 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 and MiniMax M2.1
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4.1MiniMax M2.1
MakerOpenAIMiniMax
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedApril 14, 2025December 23, 2025
Context window1.05M205K
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.30
Output $/Mtok$8.00$1.20
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it01
Cost per solved task$0.37$0.59
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4.1 better than MiniMax M2.1 for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4.1 for a lower cost per solved task ($0.37 against $0.59) and a larger context window (1.05M against 205K tokens).

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-4.1 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $8.00 per million output tokens; MiniMax M2.1 costs $0.30 and $1.20. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-4.1 costs $0.37 and MiniMax M2.1 $0.59.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4.1 or MiniMax M2.1?

GPT-4.1, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4.1 vs MiniMax M2.1 comparison based on?

29 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-4.1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and MiniMax M2.1's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next