Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
DeepSeekSummary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 89.5 to 33.3.
- DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | DeepSeek |
| Noometry Index | 68.5 | 37.0 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2024-09-06 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | — |
| Results tracked | 50 | 22 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 70.5 (#2), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 31.3 (#274)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1523 | 1310 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 17.8% |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1753 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 48.6% |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 53.2% |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 83.5% |
| MBPP+ | — | 74.1% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 50.8 (#5), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 68.6% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 17.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 29.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,422 | — |
Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#5), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 24.5 (#145)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1289 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 57.1% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| DTBench | 97.6% | — |
| LMCA | 65.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 165 | — |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.5 (#3), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 33.3 (#177)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1519 | 1289 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 69.3 (#5), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 34.2 (#190)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1528 | 1266 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 54.1 (#4), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1319 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 41.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 70% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1513 | — |
Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 59.5 (#2), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 42.7 (#188)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1509 | 1273 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1589 | 1317 |
| LMArena French | 1532 | 1288 |
| LMArena German | 1495 | 1258 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1565 | 1228 |
| LMArena Russian | 1525 | 1289 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1503 | 1248 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1209 |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.3 (#6), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 67.7 (#189)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1515 | 1280 |
Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.8 (#19), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 39.5 (#169)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1524 | 1301 |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.3 (#1), DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024): 50.0 (#182)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1511 | 1294 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1285 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1297 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024)?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.5 versus 31.3 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 50 scored results on Noometry and DeepSeek-V2.5 (Sep 2024) has 22.