Apertus 70B vs o4-mini-deep-research
o4-mini-deep-research comes out ahead, 37 to 32 on our weighted score, though Apertus 70B is 2.6× cheaper per token.
Swiss AI
Apertus 70B
32/100- ECI—
- Price$0.82 / $2.42
- Context66K
- Our pick
OpenAIo4-mini-deep-research
37/100- ECI—
- Price$1.80 / $7.20
- Context200K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
o4-mini-deep-research is our pick
o4-mini-deep-research is the better all-round choice, scoring 37/100 against Apertus 70B (32). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Apertus 70B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceApertus 70BApertus 70B $1.22 · o4-mini-deep-research $3.15 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contexto4-mini-deep-researcho4-mini-deep-research 200,000 · Apertus 70B 65,536 tokens
- Widest inputso4-mini-deep-researchApertus 70B: Text · o4-mini-deep-research: Text, Images
- Self-hostingApertus 70BPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Apertus 70B | o4-mini-deep-research |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 44 | 25 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 25 | 60 |
| Context window | 20% | 12 | 32 |
| Overall | 100% | 32/100 | 37/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Apertus 70BSwiss AI | o4-mini-deep-researchOpenAI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | — |
| ECI rank | — | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $0.82 (best) | $1.80 |
| Output | $2.42 (best) | $7.20 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $1.22 (best) | $3.15 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 3 providers | Median of 1 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 65,536 tokens | 200,000 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 8,192 tokens | 100,000 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | No | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | No | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | OpenApache-2.0 | Proprietary |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | 3 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Sep 2, 2025 | Jun 26, 2025 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Sep 2025 | May 2024 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Apertus 70B$13.04
- o4-mini-deep-research$32.40
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Apertus 70B or o4-mini-deep-research?
o4-mini-deep-research is the better all-round choice, scoring 37/100 against Apertus 70B (32). It leads on inputs & features and context window. Apertus 70B wins on price. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Apertus 70B or o4-mini-deep-research?
Apertus 70B is cheaper at $0.82 input / $2.42 output per million tokens (median across 3 API providers). o4-mini-deep-research costs $1.80 input / $7.20 output per million tokens (median across 1 API provider). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $1.22 per million tokens for Apertus 70B versus $3.15 for o4-mini-deep-research (2.6× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Apertus 70B has not been scored yet and o4-mini-deep-research has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Apertus 70B and o4-mini-deep-research yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
o4-mini-deep-research has the largest context window at 200,000 tokens, against 65,536 for Apertus 70B. Maximum output per response: Apertus 70B up to 8,192, o4-mini-deep-research up to 100,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Apertus 70B accepts text; o4-mini-deep-research accepts text and images. o4-mini-deep-research handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Apertus 70B publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; o4-mini-deep-research is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Apertus 70B is the newest, released Sep 2, 2025. o4-mini-deep-research came out Jun 26, 2025. Knowledge cutoff: Apertus 70B Sep 2025, o4-mini-deep-research May 2024.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Kimi K2 Instruct 0905Three-way comparison
- Apertus 70B vs Kimi K2 Instruct 0905Moonshot AI
- Apertus 70B vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B ThinkingAlibaba (Qwen)
- Apertus 70B vs Hermes 4 405BNous Research
- Apertus 70B vs Morph V3 LargeMorph
- o4-mini-deep-research vs Jamba LargeAI21 Labs
- o4-mini-deep-research vs Gemini 2.5 Pro Preview 06-05Google
