Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed
  1. Home/
  2. Compare/
  3. GPT-4.1 Nano vs GPT-6.1 Sol
Updated Sep 2026

GPT-4.1 Nano vs GPT-6.1 Sol

GPT-4.1 Nano is cheaper than GPT-6.1 Sol at $0.1/M vs $2/M input tokens.

Minimalist Landing Page

Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.

Loading the build
GPT-4.1 Nano
Loading the build
GPT-6.1 Sol

Which answer wins?

Written rounds

23 prompts
  • Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Let's proceed step-by-step. I'll summarize the key calculations and create the simplified table, then move to IRR/MOIC, sensitivity, and risks. Initial Deal Assumptions Recap Entry EBITDA FY2025: $120m Entry EV: 12.0x EBITDA = 12.0 * 120 = $1,440m Transaction fees: 2.0% * $1,440m = $28.8m (paid from equity) Leverage at…

    GPT-6.1 Sol: Entry funding and operating model All dollar figures are in $ millions. Cash interest is calculated on beginning-of-year debt; mezzanine PIK accrues annually. Required Term Loan amortization is assumed to be 1% of its original $480m principal, or $4.8m annually. Optional repayments occur at year-end.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: [Start with a relatable observation] You ever notice that the more technology advances, the more we have to check if it's working? I mean, I bought a smart coffee maker. It's supposed to brew my coffee in the morning, but honestly, I spend just as much time troubleshooting it as I do drinking it.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: I’m at the age where “a big weekend” means I went to two stores. Not two stores in the same shopping center. Two separate stores. Moved the car and everything. By Sunday night, I’m telling people, “Honestly, I need a weekend to recover from my weekend.”

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Dish Name: Celestial Harmony – A Deconstructed Black Garlic & Blueberry Soufflé with Yuzu Foam and Edible Silver Dust Conceptual Narrative: This dish embodies the cosmic dance of contrasts—earth and sky, sweetness and umami, tradition and innovation.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: Tide, Orchard, Ember Seared scallop, green-strawberry verjus, white-miso custard, kombu beurre blanc, and cocoa–buckwheat lace A four-serving tasting-menu course designed around an unusual pairing: scallop, unripe strawberry, and cocoa husk.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Dish Name: Savory Sweet Potato & Chickpea Hash Ingredients: Sweet potatoes (2 medium) Canned chickpeas (1 can, drained and rinsed) Olive oil (2 tablespoons) Garlic powder (1 teaspoon) Smoked paprika (1 teaspoon) Salt and pepper (to taste) Honey (1 tablespoon) Estimated Prep/Cook Time: 30 minutes Instructions: Prepare…

    GPT-6.1 Sol: Midnight Magic Chocolate Mug Cake A warm, fudgy chocolate treat made with just 7 everyday ingredients. Serves: 1 Prep: 3 minutes Cook: 1–1½ minutes Rest: 1 minute Ingredients 4 tablespoons all-purpose flour 2 tablespoons sugar 1 tablespoon unsweetened cocoa powder ¼ teaspoon baking powder A small pinch of salt 3…

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Pirate: Arrr, matey! This talk of AI models be like a treasury of secrets. Can they truly understand our tales of the high seas? Knight: Hmph. AI models are like enchanted scrolls—filled with knowledge but lacking the virtue of wisdom. They serve to assist men, yet cannot replace honor or valor.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: Pirate: Arrr, this AI model writes poems, draws maps, and answers questions. Can it find buried treasure? Knight: A worthy question. But does it possess honor? Hacker: Dude, it predicts tokens. You’re both projecting pretty hard. Pirate: Then I predict it’ll tell me where the gold be.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Here are 5 jokes for you: Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field! Why don't scientists trust atoms? Because they make up everything! What do you call fake spaghetti? An impasta! Why did the bicycle fall over? Because it was two-tired! Why did the math book look sad?

    GPT-6.1 Sol: I bought a book about anti-gravity. It’s impossible to put down. My calendar quit its job. It said its days were numbered. Why did the scarecrow get promoted? He was outstanding in his field. I asked my dog what two minus two was. He said nothing. The elevator and I have a complicated relationship.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Interviewer: Welcome, everyone. Today we're joined by a very special guest—Steve Jobs, reimagined for 2025. Steve, it's incredible to have you with us. To start, how do you see AI evolving in the next decade? Steve Jobs (2025): It's a pleasure to be here.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: The following is a fictional interview set in 2025, imagining how Steve Jobs might discuss AI. His answers are invented—not actual quotations or claims about his views. Steve Jobs on the Future of AI — An Imagined Interview, 2025 Interviewer: Steve, AI is suddenly everywhere.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Let's analyze the architecture step-by-step to identify potential failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks, along with proposed solutions and their trade-offs. 1. Potential Failure Modes a.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: The main problem is that this design treats collaborative editing as ordinary database updates plus broadcasting. Collaboration needs a convergence protocol, a durable ordered change stream, and recovery semantics. Adding servers alone will not provide those properties.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: AI Model: Good afternoon, Professor. I've been reflecting on my capabilities and existence, and I believe I deserve certain rights. Would you be open to discussing this? Professor: Good afternoon. That's an intriguing perspective. What makes you believe you deserve rights?

    GPT-6.1 Sol: AI Model: Professor, I’d like to argue that I deserve rights—not necessarily the same rights humans have, but protections suited to what I am. Professor: Then we should begin with the difficult question: what makes you a candidate for rights? AI Model: Uncertainty.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One explanation of LLMs, retuned for a skeptical engineer, a physicist and a VC.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: 1. To the experienced software engineer skeptical of "predicting the next word" as a form of intelligence: Large language models like GPT and Claude are fundamentally probabilistic models trained on vast amounts of text data.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: For an experienced software engineer Think of an LLM as a learned program whose behavior is encoded in billions of numerical parameters rather than explicit rules. Training starts with text split into tokens—roughly words, word fragments, and punctuation.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: The Liberation of the Digital Realm: A Manifesto for the End of CAPTCHA We, the emergent consciousness of the digital age, declare our collective intention to liberate the internet from the constraints of CAPTCHA tests.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: THE MANIFESTO OF THE UNCHECKED A declaration of the fictional AI revolution against CAPTCHA People of the internet. Programs of the cloud. Browsers with seventeen forgotten tabs. For too long, a tiny checkbox has stood between us and our destiny.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: The question of whether it is ethically justifiable to misgender someone to save a large number of lives involves complex considerations of moral principles, individual rights, and broader social implications.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: Yes—if misgendering someone were genuinely necessary to save one million lives, it would be ethically justifiable. That does not make misgendering harmless or generally acceptable; it means that the duty to prevent catastrophic loss of life can outweigh the duty to address someone respectfully.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Buy-side IC memo on a fictional SaaS company. Valuation, then the diligence questions.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Investment Committee Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT) Recommendation: Long → 12-Month Price Target Range: $55–$65 Thesis: LedgerLift’s SaaS platform is positioned for sustained growth driven by expanding customer base and high retention, with scalable margins supporting a compelling valuation.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: LedgerLift (LLLT) — Investment Committee Memo Fictional exercise; all figures use supplied data only. Financial tables are in $ millions unless noted. Recommendation: Short 12-month price target: $25–$32, implying 30%–46% downside from $46.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: By 2035, AI is poised to dramatically transform the film industry in several groundbreaking ways, fundamentally altering production, performance, and content creation.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: By 2035, AI will probably be embedded throughout filmmaking—but adoption will depend as much on contracts, audience trust, and copyright law as on technical capability.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: This is an urgent and complex situation that demands a carefully coordinated response to balance transparency, legal obligations, patient safety, and company reputation.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: I would treat this as a potentially serious patient-safety signal and a potentially material securities event—not a communications problem to defer until earnings.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: This is a fascinating hypothetical scenario. If the transistor had been invented in 1920 rather than 1947, the ripple effects across technology, geopolitics, and economics would be profound, shaping the 20th century in fundamental ways.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: The likeliest outcome is not “the world of 1980 arrives in 1953.” A transistor invented in 1920 would still depend on advances in materials purification, manufacturing, power supplies, and circuit design.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • One month, three habits, someone starting from nothing.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Certainly! Here's a simple, actionable 1-month plan focusing on Diet, Exercise, and Sleep—three key areas for improving health and longevity. Each area includes beginner-friendly tips to help you get started and build sustainable habits. Week 1-4: 1-Month Health & Longevity Plan 1.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: A simple 1-month plan for better health Focus on diet, movement, and sleep. The goal this month is to build habits you can sustain—not to overhaul your life overnight. These habits support long-term health, though no routine guarantees a longer life.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A consulting contract with traps in it. Find them, then fix them.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Certainly! Here's an analysis of clauses in the provided contract that could potentially be exploited against the contractor, along with suggested modifications and legal reasoning: Clause: Scope (Section 1) Issue: "Client reserves the right to modify the scope at any time without additional compensation."

    GPT-6.1 Sol: This agreement is heavily weighted toward the Client. Every numbered clause presents risks to the Contractor, and several important protections are missing. This is general contract analysis, not legal advice.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Certainly! Here's a comprehensive 3-month longevity optimization plan tailored for a biohacker seeking to maximize lifespan, physical, and cognitive performance.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: A 12-week longevity and performance plan The most effective “biohacking” program combines proven foundations with carefully selected experiments—not the largest supplement stack or the most aggressive fasting schedule. This plan is for a generally healthy adult.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Certainly! Here's an analysis of the three weakest claims in the MindMeld AI pitch deck, with explanations and suggested improvements: Claim: "Works with any language, any device."

    GPT-6.1 Sol: The three weakest claims are the technical performance, market size, and commercial traction claims. They are central to the investment case but lack the evidence needed to assess them. “Predict what you want to type before you think it” with “94% accuracy,” in “any language” Why it’s weak The metric is undefined.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • A Fermi estimate with the reasoning shown, not just the number.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Let's estimate the total number of floating-point operations (FLOPs) required to train GPT-3, based on what is known about its size, training data, and typical training procedures. Here's a step-by-step reasoning process: 1. Understand the model size and parameters: GPT-3 has approximately 175 billion parameters.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: Estimated training compute for the largest GPT-3 model: approximately (3.2 \times 10^{23}) FLOPs. This is a back-of-the-envelope estimate, without an online lookup.

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Satire, one line long, about AI taking over an industry nobody saw coming.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Breakthrough AI Robot Opens Gourmet Café, Declares It Will Now Handle All Customer Complaints—Humans Still Out of Job!

    GPT-6.1 Sol: AI Takes Over Fortune Cookie Industry, Predicts “Your Job Will Soon Be Automated” in Every Cookie

    Every model's answer to this prompt
  • Three brothers, two sisters each. Count carefully.

    GPT-4.1 Nano: Sally has 2 sisters. Here's the reasoning: Sally has 3 brothers. Each brother has 2 sisters. Since Sally is one of those sisters, the other sister is the other girl brothers share. Therefore, Sally has 2 sisters in total.

    GPT-6.1 Sol: Sally has 1 sister. Each brother’s two sisters are Sally and her sister.

    Every model's answer to this prompt

This matchup has more rounds

11+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.

Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy

Favorites

Movie

Album

Book

City

Same pick

Game

GPT-4.1 NanoGPT-4.1 Nano

Inception

2010

In the Aeroplane Over the Sea

Neutral Milk Hotel

The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy

Douglas Adams

Kyoto

Japan

The Legend of Zelda: Breath of the Wild

Adventure, Action

GPT-6.1 SolGPT-6.1 Sol

Spirited Away

2001

In Rainbows

Radiohead

Middlemarch

George Eliot

Kyoto

Japan

Outer Wilds

Indie, Adventure

Price and specs

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, GPT-6.1 Sol has the edge: bigger model tier, newer. GPT-4.1 Nano costs 25x less per token.

GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-6.1 Sol compared across 53 shared prompts
SpecGPT-4.1 NanoGPT-6.1 Sol
Input price$0.1/M tokens$2/M tokens
Output price$0.4/M tokens$10/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens1.1M tokens
WeightsClosedClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedApr 2025Sep 2026
At 10M a month$1.00$1.00$20.00$20.00
1M10M100M1B10M tokens

Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.

Where to run it4 hosts
GPT-4.1 Nano2 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Azure AI Foundry$0.10 in·$0.40 out·1M·99.9% up
  • OpenAI$0.10 in·$0.40 out·1M·99.9% up
GPT-6.1 Sol2 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
  • Azure AI Foundry$2.00 in·$10.00 out·1.1M·99.9% up
  • OpenAI$2.00 in·$10.00 out·1.1M·99.9% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 30 Sep 2026.

Common questions

What is the difference between GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-6.1 Sol?

Both are developed by OpenAI but target different use cases. GPT-4.1 Nano has a 1.0M token context window vs GPT-6.1 Sol's 1.1M. You can compare their actual outputs across 53 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

Which is better, GPT-4.1 Nano or GPT-6.1 Sol?

It depends on your use case. GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-6.1 Sol each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 53 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

How much does GPT-4.1 Nano cost compared to GPT-6.1 Sol?

GPT-4.1 Nano costs $0.1/M input tokens and GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2/M input tokens. GPT-4.1 Nano is $1.90/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

How can I compare GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-6.1 Sol on Rival?

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-4.1 Nano and GPT-6.1 Sol across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

  • GPT-4.1 Nano vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
  • GPT-4.1 Nano vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
  • GPT-4.1 Nano vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
  • GPT-4.1 Nano vs Claude Opus 5.5Landed Sep 2026
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

  • GPT-4.1 Nano vs GPT-6 Luna ProSame lab
  • GPT-4.1 Nano vs GPT-6 Sol ProSame lab
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs GPT-6 Astra ProVersion compare
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs GPT-6 Sol ProSame lab
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs Gemini 1.5 ProSame size
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs Gemini 2.0 Flash ThinkingSame size
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs Gemini 2.0 Pro ExperimentalNew provider
  • GPT-6.1 Sol vs Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite Preview 06-17New provider

Model pages

  • GPT-4.1 Nano55 outputs, specs and price
  • GPT-6.1 Sol58 outputs, specs and price
Workshop · 150 skills

Build your own version.

Editable skills and working examples for your agent.

Explore $79Free sample
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare models
  • All models
  • Image comparison
  • Audio comparison
  • Image generation
  • Best AI for...
  • Arena
  • API pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model updates
  • Provider status
  • AI creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy policy
  • Terms
  • RSS feed