Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Mistral Large 4
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Large 4 costs 19× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Mistral Large 4 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 22.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 90% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 27.4% for Mistral Large 4.
- Mistral Large 4 is cheaper at $0.68 / $2.09 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
- Mistral Large 4 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 43.1 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2026-10-06 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.68 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $2.09 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 15 |
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), Mistral Large 4: 48.6 (#57)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | 1541 |
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1475 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| 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), Mistral Large 4: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| 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), Mistral Large 4: 22.5 (#192)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | 27.4% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1444 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 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 | 164.7 | — |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Mistral Large 4: 40.4 (#91)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1525 | 1488 |
| 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), Mistral Large 4: 36.6 (#166)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | 20% |
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | 1447 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Mistral Large 4: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| 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), Mistral Large 4: 52.6 (#82)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1415 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | 1491 |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | 1414 |
| LMArena French | 1525 | — |
| LMArena German | 1500 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1543 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1534 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1516 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Mistral Large 4: 75.0 (#76)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1424 |
Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Mistral Large 4: 43.6 (#89)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | 1429 |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Mistral Large 4: 60.4 (#97)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Large 4 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | 1427 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1361 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1424 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Mistral Large 4?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 43.1 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Large 4 costs 19× 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 Mistral Large 4?
Mistral Large 4 is cheaper. It lists at $0.68 per million input tokens and $2.09 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Mistral Large 4 better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 48.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Mistral Large 4 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Mistral Large 4 share?
15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Large 4 has 15.