Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Mistral Medium
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 36.3 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Medium costs 6.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.
Mistral AISummary
- They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 10 categories and Mistral Medium in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 89.6 to 28.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 100% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 9% for Mistral Medium.
- Mistral Medium is cheaper at $1.50 / $7.50 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
- Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
- Mistral Medium has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Mistral AI |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 36.3 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2023-12-11 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 262K |
| Max output | 128K | 262K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $1.50 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $7.50 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 36 |
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 Medium: 34.2 (#243)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | 8% |
| SciCode | 63.1% | 40.2% |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | 43.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1434 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | 763.98 |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| GSO | 88.2% | — |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Mistral Medium: 28.3 (#90)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 68.6% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 37.7% |
| 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 Medium: 24.0 (#167)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 31.1% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1426 |
| DTBench | 97.6% | 75.5% |
| LMCA | 65.5% | 26.1% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 50% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 57.1% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 26.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 164.7 | — |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Mistral Medium: 28.1 (#245)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 32.2% |
| ProofBench | 100% | 9% |
| LMArena Math | 1525 | 1408 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | — | 81.6% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 0.3% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Mistral Medium: 25.0 (#265)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | 4.5% |
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | 1408 |
| GPQA Diamond | — | 59.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 22.7% |
Multimodal Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Mistral Medium: 35.3 (#88)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1318 | 1172 |
| 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 Medium: 52.1 (#91)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1408 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | 1447 |
| LMArena French | 1525 | 1459 |
| LMArena German | 1500 | 1432 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1543 | 1378 |
| LMArena Korean | 1534 | 1380 |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | 1411 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1516 | 1433 |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Mistral Medium: 73.7 (#116)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1398 |
Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Mistral Medium: 42.9 (#114)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | 1406 |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Mistral Medium: 60.0 (#103)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Mistral Medium |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | 1424 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1391 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1418 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 77.3% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Mistral Medium?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 36.3 on the Noometry Index. Mistral Medium costs 6.7× 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 Medium?
Mistral Medium is cheaper. It lists at $1.50 per million input tokens and $7.50 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Mistral Medium better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 34.2 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 Mistral Medium share?
28 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Mistral Medium has 36.