Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025)
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 34.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 24 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 24 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 10 categories and Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 76.7 to 15.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 90% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 1.3% for Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025).
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 68.5 | 34.8 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2024-12-06 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | — |
| Results tracked | 50 | 54 |
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), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.2 (#308)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 92.9% | 25.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1523 | 1351 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 13.5% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 38.2% |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1753 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 45.9% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 63.4% |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 59.9% |
| CadEval | — | 30% |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 50.8 (#5), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 28.0 (#85)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 68.6% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 17.9% | — |
| TheAgentCompany | — | 11.4% |
| GDP.pdf | 29.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,422 | — |
Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#5), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 15.2 (#308)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90% | 1.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1346 |
| DTBench | 97.6% | 63.2% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 165 | 135.36 |
| SimpleBench | — | 31.1% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 37.8% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| EnigmaEval | — | 1.1% |
| EBR-Bench | 57.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 78.2% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 69.4% |
| LMCA | 65.5% | — |
| LiveBench | — | 66.9% |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.5 (#3), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 36.1 (#127)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 57.8% |
| LMArena Math | 1519 | 1351 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 45.9% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 75.8% |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 82.2% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 1.7% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 69.3 (#5), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 32.0 (#207)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | 6.6% |
| LMArena Expert | 1528 | 1340 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 64.1% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 73.7% |
| Confabulations | — | 12.4% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 55.6% |
| MMLU | — | 79.7% |
Multimodal Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 54.1 (#4), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 35.9 (#74)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1319 | 1158 |
| GeoBench | — | 77% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 41.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 70% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1513 | — |
Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 59.5 (#2), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 47.6 (#144)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1509 | 1342 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1589 | 1373 |
| LMArena French | 1532 | 1390 |
| LMArena German | 1495 | 1354 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1565 | 1293 |
| LMArena Russian | 1525 | 1351 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1503 | 1363 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1314 |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.3 (#6), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 74.6 (#91)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1515 | 1336 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 85.8% |
| IFEval | — | 84.1% |
Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.8 (#19), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 38.1 (#198)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1524 | 1345 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 61.1% |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.3 (#1), Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025): 49.8 (#184)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1511 | 1354 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1340 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | 1128 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1350 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 73.8% |
| WildBench | — | 80% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 51.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025)?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 34.8 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.5 versus 28.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) share?
24 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 50 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.0 Flash (Feb 2025) has 54.