Compare/GPT-4.1 nano vs Jamba 1.5 Mini

GPT-4.1 nanovsJamba 1.5 Mini

Side-by-side comparison of pricing, 12 benchmarks, and generation speed.

OpenAI

GPT-4.1 nano

Input
$0.1/M
Output
$0.4/M
Speed
143 tok/s
TTFT
0.71s
AI21 Labs

Jamba 1.5 Mini

Input
$0.2/M
Output
$0.4/M
Speed
TTFT

Winner by Category

Cheaper
GPT-4.1 nano
Faster (tok/s)
GPT-4.1 nano
Lower Latency
GPT-4.1 nano
Benchmarks (2-0)
GPT-4.1 nano

Pricing Comparison

MetricGPT-4.1 nanoJamba 1.5 Mini
Input ($/M tokens)$0.1$0.2
Output ($/M tokens)$0.4$0.4
Cost for 1M input + 100K output tokens:
GPT-4.1 nano$0.14
Jamba 1.5 Mini$0.24

Speed Comparison

Output Speed (tokens/s) — higher is better
GPT-4.1 nano
143 tok/s
Jamba 1.5 Mini
Time to First Token (seconds) — lower is better
GPT-4.1 nano
0.71s
Jamba 1.5 Mini

Editorial Analysis

Verdict. GPT-4.1 nano wins the overall benchmark matchup 2–0 across 2 overlapping categories, but raw benchmark score is only one input to the decision.

Pricing. Both models sit in the budget bracket for output-token pricing. At 1.0× the per-million-token cost, Jamba 1.5 Mini is meaningfully cheaper if your traffic is output-heavy (long completions, document generation, agent loops). Jamba 1.5 Mini makes more sense when output volume is low and absolute reasoning quality justifies the premium.

Strengths. GPT-4.1 nano is strongest on Coding Index (11.1), Intelligence Index (9.6). Jamba 1.5 Mini leads on Intelligence Index (2.3).

Speed. Speed data is incomplete for this pair; benchmark and price should decide.

Provider. OpenAI and AI21 Labs sell to overlapping but distinct developer audiences: OpenAI tends to ship frontier reasoning models with premium positioning, while AI21 Labs often prices more aggressively. Your existing vendor relationships, billing, and SLA preferences may matter as much as the raw numbers above.

Workload cost. Workload scenarios (per million requests at 30M input + 15M output tokens): GPT-4.1 nano costs $9.00 ($108/year); Jamba 1.5 Mini costs $12.00 ($144/year). At a smaller 5M-input/2M-output scale (single-developer tool or prototype): GPT-4.1 nano ≈ $1.30/run, Jamba 1.5 Mini ≈ $1.80/run. At agent/realtime scale (200M input / 100M output per million requests): GPT-4.1 nano ≈ $60/run, Jamba 1.5 Mini ≈ $80/run. GPT-4.1 nano becomes more attractive at higher volume — the absolute per-token pricing difference compounds when you ship at scale.

Recommendation. Both models have legitimate use cases — the right answer depends on whether you are optimizing for benchmark ceiling, latency, or unit cost. Start with the cheaper / faster model, evaluate against your specific task, and only switch if the upgrade shows a meaningful lift.

Benchmark Comparison

Data from Artificial Analysis API — 12 benchmarks

Intelligence Index
9.62.3
Coding Index
11.1
Math Index
GPQA Diamond
MMLU-Pro
LiveCodeBench
AIME 2025
MATH-500
Humanity's Last Exam
SciCode
IFBench
TerminalBench
GPT-4.1 nano2 wins
0 winsJamba 1.5 Mini

Frequently Asked Questions

Which is cheaper, GPT-4.1 nano or Jamba 1.5 Mini?

GPT-4.1 nano is cheaper overall. Its blended price (3:1 input/output ratio) is $0.17/M tokens vs $0.25/M for Jamba 1.5 Mini.

Which model performs better on benchmarks?

GPT-4.1 nano wins 2 out of 12 benchmarks compared to 0 for Jamba 1.5 Mini. See the detailed benchmark chart above for per-category results.

Which is faster for real-time applications?

GPT-4.1 nano generates tokens faster at 143 tok/s vs — tok/s. GPT-4.1 nano also has lower time-to-first-token (0.71s vs —s).

When should I use GPT-4.1 nano vs Jamba 1.5 Mini?

Choose based on your priorities: GPT-4.1 nano for lower cost, GPT-4.1 nano for stronger benchmark performance, and GPT-4.1 nano for faster generation. For latency-sensitive apps, check the TTFT comparison above.