Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs QwQ Plus

Claude Fable 5.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#2); QwQ Plus does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

QwQ Plus Alibaba (Qwen)

38.0

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 69.6 to 36.4.
  • QwQ Plus is cheaper at $0.80 / $2.40 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index69.038.0
Released2026-09-012025-03-05
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M131K
Max output128K8K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.80
Output $ / M tokens$50$2.40
Results tracked521

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 74.7 (#1), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
FrontierCode50.9%—
CursorBench51.8%—
LMArena WebDev1744—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
SciCode63.1%—
GSO88.2%—
WeirdML92.9%—
LMArena Coding1528—
MirrorCode73.3%—
ALE-Bench2,143—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
APEX-Agents68.6%—
Remote Labor Index17.9%—
GDP.pdf29.6%—
Vending-Bench 25,422—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
ARC-AGI-290%—
NYT Connections (extended)90%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.1%—
Chess Puzzles47%—
EBR-Bench57.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1526—
Mystery Game Puzzles58%—
DTBench97.6%—
LMCA65.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7—

Math Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1525—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), QwQ Plus: 36.4

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
GPQA Diamond—65.4%
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—
LMArena Expert1535—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
LMArena Non-English1507—
LMArena Chinese1586—
LMArena French1525—
LMArena German1500—
LMArena Japanese1543—
LMArena Korean1534—
LMArena Russian1521—
LMArena Spanish1516—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
LMArena Instruction Following1517—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
LMArena Longer Query1522—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), QwQ Plus: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1QwQ Plus
LMArena Text1510—
LMArena Creative Writing1507—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—
LMArena Multi-Turn1492—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than QwQ Plus?

Claude Fable 5.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#2); QwQ Plus does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or QwQ Plus?

QwQ Plus is cheaper. It lists at $0.80 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?

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

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and QwQ Plus share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and QwQ Plus has 1.

Related comparisons

Go deeper