Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 27× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.
Alibaba (Qwen)Summary
- They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B 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 33.3.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper at $0.66 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
- Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 33K.
- Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Alibaba (Qwen) |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 33.4 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2024-09-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | 33K |
| Max output | 128K | 29K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.66 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $1 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 31 |
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), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1276 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 9% |
| Aider Polyglot | — | 16.4% |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| GSO | 88.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | — |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | — | 49% |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 56.9% |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | — | 58% |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | — |
| HumanEval+ | — | 87.2% |
| MBPP+ | — | 77% |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| 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), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1251 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 164.7 | 119.49 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 57.1% | — |
| LiveBench Reasoning | — | 42.1% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| DTBench | 97.6% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 49.9% |
| LMCA | 65.5% | — |
| HellaSwag | — | 83% |
| LiveBench | — | 46.2% |
| WinoGrande | — | 80.8% |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1525 | 1251 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 46.6% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 93% |
Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | 1221 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 70.5% |
| MMLU | — | 79.1% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| 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), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1205 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | 1222 |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | 1228 |
| 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), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1223 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 58.7% |
Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | 1251 |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen2.5-Coder-32B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | 1230 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1174 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1222 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 23.3% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5-Coder-32B costs 27× 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 Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?
Qwen2.5-Coder-32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.66 per million input tokens and $1 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Fable 5.1 does, with 1M tokens against 33K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?
13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.