Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs o4-mini

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 41.6 on the Noometry Index. o4-mini costs 10× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 34 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

o4-mini OpenAI

41.6

Rank #132 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 10 categories and o4-mini 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 24.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is GSO: 88.2% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 3.6% for o4-mini.
  • o4-mini is cheaper at $1.10 / $4.40 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1 and o4-mini specifications
Claude Fable 5.1o4-mini
ProviderAnthropicOpenAI
Noometry Index69.041.6
Released2026-09-012025-04-16
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M200K
Max output128K100K
Input $ / M tokens$10$1.10
Output $ / M tokens$50$4.40
Results tracked5260

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), o4-mini: 40.9 (#127)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
GSO88.2%3.6%
WeirdML92.9%52.6%
LMArena Coding15281368
ALE-Bench2,143826.17
FrontierCode50.9%—
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—45%
Aider Polyglot—72%
CursorBench51.8%—
LMArena WebDev1744—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
SciCode63.1%—
MirrorCode73.3%—
CadEval—62%
AlgoTune—1.72

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), o4-mini: 32.6 (#61)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
APEX-Agents68.6%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—53.2%
GDPval—25.3%
Remote Labor Index17.9%—
GDP.pdf29.6%—
METR Time Horizons—63.9%
Vending-Bench 25,422—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7), o4-mini: 24.6 (#162)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
ARC-AGI-290%6.1%
ARC-AGI-197.5%58.7%
CritPt31.1%0.6%
Chess Puzzles47%26%
LMArena Hard Prompts15261351
Mystery Game Puzzles58%5%
DTBench97.6%77.6%
LMCA65.5%26.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7145.64
SimpleBench—38.7%
Kagi LLM Benchmark—67.6%
NYT Connections (extended)90%—
EnigmaEval—9.2%
EBR-Bench57.1%—
ForecastBench—61.8

Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), o4-mini: 40.8 (#89)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%36.1%
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%4.9%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%81.7%
LMArena Math15251389
ProofBench100%—
Omni-MATH—72%
MATH Level 5—97.8%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—24.8%
FrontierMath Erdős0%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—6.3%

Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), o4-mini: 43.6 (#91)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%18.1%
SimpleQA Verified70.8%19.6%
LMArena Expert15351343
GPQA Diamond—79.6%
MMLU-Pro—82%
Confabulations—15.8%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—18.6%
GPQA (HELM)—73.5%

Multimodal Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), o4-mini: 40.2 (#49)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
LMArena Vision13181194
GeoBench—64%
VPCT—57.5%
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), o4-mini: 47.0 (#154)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
LMArena Non-English15071337
LMArena Chinese15861354
LMArena French15251364
LMArena German15001336
LMArena Japanese15431308
LMArena Korean15341312
LMArena Russian15211334
LMArena Spanish15161347

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), o4-mini: 75.2 (#68)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
LMArena Instruction Following15171321
IFEval—92.8%

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), o4-mini: 45.5 (#33)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
LMArena Longer Query15221315
Fiction.LiveBench—77.8%

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), o4-mini: 54.0 (#152)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1o4-mini
LMArena Text15101353
LMArena Creative Writing15071294
LMArena Multi-Turn14921350
Short-Story Creative Writing—75%
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—
WildBench—85.4%

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than o4-mini?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 41.6 on the Noometry Index. o4-mini costs 10× 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 o4-mini?

o4-mini is cheaper. It lists at $1.10 per million input tokens and $4.40 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or o4-mini better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5.1 does, with 1M tokens against 200K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and o4-mini share?

34 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and o4-mini has 60.

Related comparisons

Go deeper