Home › Compare › GPT-4.1 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
GPT-4.1 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
A straight cost comparison of GPT-4.1 (OpenAI) and Claude Sonnet 4.6 (Anthropic), per 1,000,000 tokens, verified October 2026.
Rate-by-rate comparison
| Metric | GPT-4.1 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / 1M | $2 | $3 | GPT-4.1 |
| Cached input / 1M | $0.50 | $0.30 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 |
| Cache write / 1M | — | $3.75 | GPT-4.1 |
| Output / 1M | $8 | $15 | GPT-4.1 |
| Context window | 1,047,576 | 1,000,000 | GPT-4.1 |
| Batch API | Yes | Yes | Tie |
| Long-context tier | None | None | — |
For per-token metrics, the lower number wins. For context window and batch support, the higher or broader option wins. A dash means the provider does not publish that rate: a missing cache-write fee means writes are not billed per token, while a missing cached-input rate means cache hits bill at the full input rate.
Blended cost: 1M input + 250K output
| Model | Blended cost | Difference |
|---|---|---|
| GPT-4.1 | $4 | Cheaper |
| Claude Sonnet 4.6 | $6.75 | +$2.75 |
Ten workloads, two bills
The same two models, priced across ten workloads that differ only in their input:output ratio. Nothing else changes — no retries, no system prompt, no middleware.
| Workload | GPT-4.1 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Classification 100K reqs · 500 in / 10 out | $108 | $165 | GPT-4.1 |
| Data extraction 10K reqs · 2K in / 200 out | $56 | $90 | GPT-4.1 |
| Support chat 1K reqs · 4K in / 600 out | $12.80 | $21 | GPT-4.1 |
| Code review 2K reqs · 8K in / 1.5K out | $56 | $93 | GPT-4.1 |
| Summarisation 1K reqs · 20K in / 1K out | $48 | $75 | GPT-4.1 |
| Agent loop 5K reqs · 12K in / 2K out | $200 | $330 | GPT-4.1 |
| Translation 500 reqs · 15K in / 15K out | $75 | $135 | GPT-4.1 |
| Long-document QA 200 reqs · 120K in / 800 out | $49.28 | $74.40 | GPT-4.1 |
| Cached RAG 1K reqs · 50K in (45K cached) / 1K out | $40.57 | $43.66 | GPT-4.1 |
| Nightly batch 10K reqs · 10K in / 2K out | $180 | $300 | GPT-4.1 |
GPT-4.1 wins 10 of 10, Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins 0 of 10. The winner is set by the token mix, not by the headline rate.
Where the two bills cross over
GPT-4.1 is cheaper on both sides of the mix: $2 vs $3 per million input tokens, and $8 vs $15 per million output. No input:output ratio reverses that, so on price alone the other model never becomes the better choice — it has to win on context, latency or output quality.
Cost at four scales
The same support-chat workload (4K input, 600 output per request) at four monthly volumes.
| Requests / month | GPT-4.1 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| 100 | $1.28 | $2.10 | GPT-4.1 cheaper by $0.82 |
| 1,000 | $12.80 | $21 | GPT-4.1 cheaper by $8.20 |
| 10,000 | $128 | $210 | GPT-4.1 cheaper by $82 |
| 100,000 | $1,280 | $2,100 | GPT-4.1 cheaper by $820 |
What caching does to each bill
Caching only helps the part of the prompt that repeats. This is the support-chat workload (1,000 requests, 4,000 input tokens each) with an increasing share of that prompt served from a warm cache, written once on the first request.
| Cached share of the prompt | GPT-4.1 | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0% | $12.80 | $21 | GPT-4.1 |
| 50% | $9.80 | $15.61 | GPT-4.1 |
| 80% | $8 | $12.37 | GPT-4.1 |
| 95% | $7.11 | $10.75 | GPT-4.1 |
Both models publish a cached-read rate, so the discount is comparable: GPT-4.1 reads cache at $0.50 per million, Claude Sonnet 4.6 at $0.30.
Which one should you pick?
GPT-4.1 wins on classification, data extraction, support chat, code review, summarisation, agent loop, translation, long-document qa, cached rag, nightly batch, while Claude Sonnet 4.6 wins on none of the ten workloads above.
Beyond price, the two differ on input rate ($2 vs $3); output rate ($8 vs $15); cached-input rate ($0.50 vs $0.30); cache-write rate (— vs $3.75); context window (1,047,576 vs 1,000,000).
Batch mode is available on GPT-4.1 and Claude Sonnet 4.6, which halves the nightly job. Both publish cached-input discounts, so a stable system prompt is worth caching on either.
FAQ
Is GPT-4.1 cheaper than Claude Sonnet 4.6?
On a blended 1M-input-plus-250K-output workload, GPT-4.1 is cheaper by 41% ($4 vs $6.75). The gap changes for cache-heavy prompts and for batch jobs, as the workload table shows.
Which handles longer prompts, GPT-4.1 or Claude Sonnet 4.6?
GPT-4.1 has the larger context window (1,047,576 vs 1,000,000 tokens). Neither model publishes a long-context surcharge.
Do both models support prompt caching?
GPT-4.1 bills cached reads at $0.50 per 1M; Claude Sonnet 4.6 at $0.30.
Related comparisons
- GPT-5.4 mini vs GPT-4.1
- GPT-6.1 Sol vs GPT-4.1
- Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6
- All OpenAI pricing
- All Anthropic pricing