GPT-4.1 Mini vs Grok 3

Summary of our 12-test suite (in our testing): Grok 3 wins 5 tests, GPT-4.1 Mini wins 1, and 6 tests tie. Detailed walk-through:

• Structured_output: Grok 3 scores 5 vs GPT-4.1 Mini 4. Grok 3 is tied for 1st of 54 models on this test (tied with 24 others); Mini ranks 26 of 54. This matters where strict JSON/schema compliance is required (data extraction, API outputs).
• Strategic_analysis: Grok 3 scores 5 vs Mini 4. Grok 3 is tied for 1st of 54; Mini ranks 27 of 54. Expect Grok 3 to handle nuanced tradeoffs and numerical reasoning better in planning scenarios.
• Faithfulness: Grok 3 5 vs Mini 4. Grok 3 ties for 1st of 55; Mini ranks 34 of 55. For tasks needing strict adherence to source text and low hallucination, Grok 3 leads.
• Classification: Grok 3 4 vs Mini 3. Grok 3 is tied for 1st of 53; Mini ranks 31 of 53. Routing, tagging, and intent classification favor Grok 3.
• Agentic_planning: Grok 3 5 vs Mini 4. Grok 3 ties for 1st of 54; Mini ranks 16 of 54. Grok 3 is stronger at goal decomposition and recovery planning.
• Constrained_rewriting: GPT-4.1 Mini wins (4 vs Grok 3’s 3). Mini ranks 6 of 53 on this test — useful for tight-summary/compression tasks.
• Ties (no clear winner): creative problem solving (3/3), tool calling (4/4), long context (5/5), safety calibration (2/2), persona consistency (5/5), multilingual (5/5). Notably both tie for 1st in long context and multilingual capability (tied with many models), so both handle large contexts and non-English output at the top tier in our suite.
• External math benchmarks (supplementary): GPT-4.1 Mini scores 87.3% on MATH Level 5 and 44.7% on AIME 2025 (Epoch AI). Grok 3 has no external MATH/AIME entries in the payload to reference. These external scores indicate Mini’s competitive performance on high-difficulty math tasks per Epoch AI, but are separate from our 1–5 internal tests. Practical takeaway: Grok 3 is the stronger specialist for schema outputs, classification, faithfulness and multi-step planning; GPT-4.1 Mini ties on long context and multilingual tasks and outperforms on constrained rewriting while being far cheaper.

Costs are per mTok (per 1,000 tokens). GPT-4.1 Mini: input $0.40/mTok, output $1.60/mTok. Grok 3: input $3.00/mTok, output $15.00/mTok. Example monthly costs (output-only basis):

• 1M output tokens (1,000 mTok): Mini = $1,600; Grok 3 = $15,000.
• 10M output tokens (10,000 mTok): Mini = $16,000; Grok 3 = $150,000.
• 100M output tokens (100,000 mTok): Mini = $160,000; Grok 3 = $1,500,000. If you split input/output 50/50, double the input costs above accordingly. The priceRatio field (0.1067) shows Mini costs ~10.7% of Grok 3 on the same token volumes on average. Who should care: startups, consumer chat apps, and any high-throughput service will see large savings with GPT-4.1 Mini; enterprises requiring top structured-output fidelity, classification, or agentic planning may accept Grok 3’s higher costs for those gains.

Choose GPT-4.1 Mini if: you run high-volume apps or chatbots where token cost matters (Mini output $1.60/mTok vs Grok 3 $15.00/mTok), need top-tier long-context or multilingual performance at scale, or require strong constrained rewriting/compression. Choose Grok 3 if: you need best-in-class structured output, faithfulness, classification, strategic analysis or agentic planning (Grok 3 wins 5 of 12 benchmarks and holds multiple rank‑1 ties), and you can accept an order-of-magnitude higher token bill for those capabilities.