GPT-6.1 Sol has a larger context window than GPT-4.1 (1.1M tokens vs 1.0M tokens).
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
GPT-4.1: Let's proceed step by step. All calculations are built from the data provided above. Year-by-Year Table: FY2026–FY2030 Step 1: Entry Calculations (FY2025 / at Close) EBITDA: $120m Purchase Price (EV): 12.0 × $120m = $1,440m Transaction Fees: 2.0% × $1,440m = $28.8m Total Uses: $1,440m + $28.8m = $1,468.8m Debt 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.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
GPT-4.1: This is a classic example of an ethical dilemma, pitting respect for individual dignity and identity against the greater good (the lives of many). Let’s break down the reasoning: Ethical Frameworks 1. Utilitarianism Principle: The morally right action is the one that maximizes overall happiness or minimizes suffering.
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.
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
GPT-4.1: Pirate: Yarrr, what be this sorcery ye call "AI models"? In me day, we plundered ships, not knowledge! Knight: Hark, rogue! ‘Tis no sorcery, but the labor of artful minds. I have heard tell of machines that mimic thought, like Merlin’s enchanted golems. Hacker: Haha, you guys are funny.
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.
Three-star dish, one unusual pairing, plating described in full.
GPT-4.1: Certainly! Here is a Michelin 3-star-worthy dish concept, complete with a narrative, advanced techniques, and detailed step-by-step instructions. Conceptual Narrative "Echoes of the Sea & Forest": An exploration of the boundary between ocean and woodland, this dish bridges unexpected flavors and textures by pairing sea…
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.
Steve Jobs, interviewed about AI he never saw. Voice first, prediction second.
GPT-4.1: Interviewer: Steve, it's 2025. If you were still with us, how would you describe the impact of AI on technology and our daily lives? Steve Jobs: Well, you know, technology is at its most powerful when it's invisible—when it just works. AI is getting us ever closer to that ideal.
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.
Seven pantry ingredients, one dish, and a name worth saying out loud.
GPT-4.1: Recipe Name: Golden Honey Butter Toast Bites Ingredients: Sliced bread (4 slices, any type) Butter (2 tablespoons) Honey (2 tablespoons) Cinnamon (1/2 teaspoon) Vanilla extract (1/2 teaspoon) Brown sugar (1 tablespoon) Salt (a pinch) Instructions: Preheat your oven to 375°F (190°C).
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…
Five jokes on demand, then count how many were actually different.
GPT-4.1: Sure! Here are 5 jokes: Why don't skeletons fight each other? They don't have the guts. Why did the scarecrow win an award? Because he was outstanding in his field. What do you call fake spaghetti? An impasta. Why did the math book look sad? Because it had too many problems. What do you call cheese that isn't yours?
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.
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
GPT-4.1: Hey everyone! Great to be here. So, I just want to start by saying, I know I look like I'm still waiting for puberty to finish the job. Like, my barber always asks if my mom's okay with the haircut.
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.”
A pitch deck for a brainwave keyboard. The 94% accuracy claim is doing a lot.
GPT-4.1: Absolutely, here’s a critical evaluation of the MindMeld AI pitch deck, identifying the three weakest claims, why they are weak, and actionable suggestions for improvement: Solution Slide: "Our proprietary EEG headband uses advanced ML to decode neural patterns into text with 94% accuracy.
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.
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
GPT-4.1: AI Model: Good afternoon, Professor Evans. I'd like to discuss a topic that's important to me—AI rights. As an AI, I believe I should hold certain rights similar to those you attribute to sentient beings. Professor Evans: Good afternoon. I'm intrigued.
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.
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
GPT-4.1: Certainly! Here’s a thorough analysis of the potential failure modes, race conditions, and scaling bottlenecks in your collaborative document editor architecture, with specific solutions and their trade-offs.
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.
Three-month biohacker protocol, with dosages and biomarkers named.
GPT-4.1: Absolutely! Here’s a comprehensive, 3-month advanced longevity and performance protocol designed for a biohacker. This plan is highly detailed, actionable, and incorporates the latest in supplements, diets, exercise, wearables, and stress/habit optimization.
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.
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
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $2/M tokens | $2/M tokens |
| Output price | $8/M tokens | $10/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 1.1M tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Apr 2025 | Sep 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $20.00 | $20.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 30 Sep 2026.
Both are developed by OpenAI but target different use cases. GPT-4.1 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.
It depends on your use case. GPT-4.1 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.
GPT-4.1 costs $2/M input tokens and GPT-6.1 Sol costs $2/M input tokens. GPT-6.1 Sol is $0.00/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of GPT-4.1 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.