Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.5 Plus

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 Plus costs 22× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 9 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

68.5

Rank #2 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

42.3

Rank #103 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 9 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 4 categories and Qwen3.5 Plus in 0 categories; 4 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 76.7 to 32.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 70.8% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 25.4% for Qwen3.5 Plus.
  • Qwen3.5 Plus is cheaper at $0.40 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index68.542.3
Released2026-09-012026-02-16
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.40
Output $ / M tokens$50$2.40
Results tracked5015

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 70.5 (#2), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
ALE-Bench2,143621.92
FrontierCode50.9%—
CursorBench51.8%—
LMArena WebDev1753—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
SciCode63.1%—
WeirdML92.9%—
LMArena Coding1523—
MirrorCode73.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.8 (#5), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
Vending-Bench 25,4220.54
APEX-Agents68.6%—
Remote Labor Index17.9%—
GDP.pdf29.6%—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#5), Qwen3.5 Plus: 32.0 (#67)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
Chess Puzzles47%22%
Mystery Game Puzzles58%17%
DTBench97.6%80.5%
LMCA65.5%36.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index165146.79
ARC-AGI-290%—
NYT Connections (extended)90%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.1%—
EBR-Bench57.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1526—

Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.5 (#3), Qwen3.5 Plus: 47.9 (#55)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%86.7%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1519—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—21%
FrontierMath Erdős0%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—2.1%

Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.3 (#5), Qwen3.5 Plus: 46.0 (#78)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
SimpleQA Verified70.8%25.4%
GPQA Diamond—84.8%
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.7%
LMArena Expert1528—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 54.1 (#4), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Vision1319—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.5 (#2), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Non-English1509—
LMArena Chinese1589—
LMArena French1532—
LMArena German1495—
LMArena Japanese1565—
LMArena Russian1525—
LMArena Spanish1503—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.3 (#6), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Instruction Following1515—

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.8 (#19), Qwen3.5 Plus: 42.9 (#109)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
CL-bench—19.8%
CL-bench Life—12.4%
LMArena Longer Query1524—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.3 (#1), Qwen3.5 Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 Plus
LMArena Text1511—
LMArena Creative Writing1507—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—
LMArena Multi-Turn1492—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Qwen3.5 Plus?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 68.5 to 42.3 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 Plus costs 22× 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 Qwen3.5 Plus?

Qwen3.5 Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.40 per million input tokens and $2.40 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Qwen3.5 Plus share?

9 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 50 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 Plus has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper