Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4.1 vs Saba

GPT-4.1 leads Saba on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 12.7 to 6.5, and Saba costs 13.3x less per output token ($0.60 vs $8.00 per million). Updated October 21, 2026; 4 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-4.1OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
12.7
Output $/M
$8.00
3
SabaMistral AI
Coding
No data
Overall
6.5
Output $/M
$0.60
1
vs boards won of 4 shared

GPT-4.1 or Saba: which to pick

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

Pick GPT-4.1 for a larger context window (1.05M against 33K tokens) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Shared results
4
GPT-4.1 only
83
Saba only
0
Like-for-like categories
3 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, Saba not benchmarked.
Widest category
Knowledge, 19.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run): GPT-4.1 66.6% against Saba 42.4%, 24.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4.1 $8.00 against Saba $0.60 per million output tokens, 13.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-4.1 takes 1.05M tokens, Saba 33K.

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-4.1BarsSabaTies
Intelligence10
Reasoning11
Knowledge10
All shared boards31
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index10 boards, none shared
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
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%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)45.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)13.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
WeirdML39.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
ALE-Bench558.1Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: coding1390Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1391Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
AA Intelligence Index12.76.5GPT-4.1
Epoch Capabilities Index136.7Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
τ²-Bench Telecom47.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index11
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
GPQA Diamond65.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)72.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)66.6%42.4%GPT-4.1
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%4.3%Saba
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
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
AIME39.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MATH 500 (Vals AI)87.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)87.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
AA Math Index34.7Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)34.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
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 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
MMLU Pro80.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)83.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)69.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)63.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)65.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)91.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)80.6%61.1%GPT-4.1
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
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
Design Arena: websites1039Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: UI components1000Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: game dev1080Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: data viz1104Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: 3D850Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Design Arena: all code categories1026Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for GPT-4.1 and Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
IFBench43.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)68.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4.1 measured
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
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 Saba
BenchmarkGPT-4.1SabaLeader
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
Saba$0.0005Fits in one request

Saba costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4.1$0.124Fits in one request
Saba$0.012Exceeds the context window

Saba costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4.1$0.480Fits in one request
Saba$0.046Exceeds the context window

Saba 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 Saba
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4.1Mistral Saba
MakerOpenAIMistral AI
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 14, 2025February 17, 2025
Context window1.05M33K
Input $/Mtok$2.00$0.20
Output $/Mtok$8.00$0.60
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved task$0.37Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4.1 better than Saba for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4.1 for a larger context window (1.05M against 33K tokens) and work measured by Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 or Saba?

GPT-4.1 costs $2.00 per million input tokens and $8.00 per million output tokens; Saba costs $0.20 and $0.60. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-4.1 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-4.1 or Saba?

GPT-4.1, with 1.05M tokens against 33K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4.1 vs Saba comparison based on?

4 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GPT-4.1's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Saba's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next