Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Magistral Medium
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 7.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Magistral Medium in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 76.7 to 8.6.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-1: 97.5% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 6.1% for Magistral Medium.
- Magistral Medium is cheaper at $2 / $5 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
- Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- Magistral Medium has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 35.2 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2025-03-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 16K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $2 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $5 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 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: 74.7 (#1), Magistral Medium: 39.1 (#161)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 63.1% | 39.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1319 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| GSO | 88.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | — |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Magistral Medium: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| 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 (#7), Magistral Medium: 8.6 (#348)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90% | 0% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | 6.1% |
| CritPt | 31.1% | 0.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1267 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 16.2% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 57.1% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| DTBench | 97.6% | — |
| LMCA | 65.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 164.7 | — |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Magistral Medium: 35.1 (#189)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1525 | 1250 |
| 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: 69.6 (#6), Magistral Medium: 33.5 (#202)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | 1223 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Magistral Medium: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1318 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 41.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 70% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1513 | — |
Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Magistral Medium: 39.6 (#224)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1232 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | 1227 |
| LMArena French | 1525 | 1267 |
| LMArena German | 1500 | 1248 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1543 | 1175 |
| LMArena Korean | 1534 | 1125 |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | 1224 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1516 | 1271 |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Magistral Medium: 66.0 (#211)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1254 |
Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Magistral Medium: 39.3 (#183)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | 1295 |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Magistral Medium: 46.3 (#219)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Magistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | 1255 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1245 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1275 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Magistral Medium?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 35.2 on the Noometry Index. Magistral Medium costs 7.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or Magistral Medium?
Magistral Medium is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $5 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Magistral Medium better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 39.1 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Fable 5.1 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Magistral Medium share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Magistral Medium has 22.