Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index. Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 costs 50× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 NVIDIA

40.3

Rank #151 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 89.6 to 38.2.
  • Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 is cheaper at $0.40 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
ProviderAnthropicNVIDIA
Noometry Index69.040.3
Released2026-09-012025-07-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M131K
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$50$0.40
Results tracked5212

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), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 39.8 (#154)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Coding15281355
FrontierCode50.9%—
CursorBench51.8%—
LMArena WebDev1744—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
SciCode63.1%—
GSO88.2%—
WeirdML92.9%—
MirrorCode73.3%—
ALE-Bench2,143—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
APEX-Agents68.6%—
Remote Labor Index17.9%—
GDP.pdf29.6%—
Vending-Bench 25,422—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 26.8 (#128)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Hard Prompts15261336
ARC-AGI-290%—
NYT Connections (extended)90%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.1%—
Chess Puzzles47%—
EBR-Bench57.1%—
Mystery Game Puzzles58%—
DTBench97.6%—
LMCA65.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7—

Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 38.2 (#141)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Math15251392
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 36.7 (#165)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Expert15351330
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 45.5 (#168)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Non-English15071316
LMArena Japanese15431300
LMArena Russian15211332
LMArena Chinese1586—
LMArena French1525—
LMArena German1500—
LMArena Korean1534—
LMArena Spanish1516—

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 68.6 (#188)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Instruction Following15171299

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 40.0 (#164)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Longer Query15221315

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5: 53.1 (#159)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5
LMArena Text15101338
LMArena Creative Writing15071307
LMArena Multi-Turn14921334
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 40.3 on the Noometry Index. Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 costs 50× 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 Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5?

Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 39.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5.1 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Nvidia Llama 3.3 Nemotron Super 49b v1.5 has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper