+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
VS
GPT-4.1 nano vs Mistral NeMo Instruct
Comprehensive side-by-side LLM comparison
GPT-4.1 nano leads with 12.1% higher average benchmark score. GPT-4.1 nano offers 824.3K more tokens in context window than Mistral NeMo Instruct. Both models have similar pricing. GPT-4.1 nano supports multimodal inputs. Overall, GPT-4.1 nano is the stronger choice for coding tasks.
+
+
+
+
OpenAI
GPT-4.1 Nano was developed as the smallest and most efficient variant in the GPT-4.1 family, designed for applications requiring minimal latency and resource usage. Built to enable AI capabilities on edge devices and resource-constrained environments, it distills GPT-4.1 capabilities into an ultra-compact form factor.
+
+
+
+
Mistral AI
Mistral Nemo was developed as a mid-sized instruction-tuned model, designed to balance capability with efficiency for practical deployments. Built to serve as a versatile foundation for various applications, it provides reliable performance across general language understanding and generation tasks.
9 months newer
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Mistral AI
2024-07-18
GPT-4.1 nano
OpenAI
2025-04-14
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
Pricing Comparison
Cost per million tokens (USD)
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Input:$0.10
Output:$0.40
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input:$0.15
Output:$0.15($0.20 cheaper)
Performance Metrics
Context window and performance specifications
Average performance across 1 common benchmarks
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Average Score:80.1%(+12.1%)
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Average Score:68.0%
+
+
+
+
Knowledge Cutoff
Training data recency comparison
GPT-4.1 nano
2024-05-31
More recent knowledge cutoff means awareness of newer technologies and frameworks
Provider Availability & Performance
Available providers and their performance metrics
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
1 providers
OpenAI
Throughput: 200 tok/s
Latency: 2ms
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
+
+
+
+
GPT-4.1 nano
Avg Score:80.1%(+12.1%)
Providers:1
+
+
+
+
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Avg Score:68.0%
Providers:2