Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Sonar
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 38.5 on the Noometry Index. Sonar costs 20× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.
PerplexitySummary
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 89.6 to 33.7.
- Sonar is cheaper at $1 / $1 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
- Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Perplexity |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 38.5 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2024-01-01 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 128K |
| Max output | 128K | 4K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $1 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $1 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 7 |
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), Sonar: 35.7 (#221)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| GSO | 88.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 35.1% |
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | — |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| 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), Sonar: 21.1 (#227)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | — | 46.3% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| DTBench | 97.6% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 37.9% |
| LMCA | 65.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 164.7 | — |
| LiveBench | — | 46.9% |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Sonar: 33.7 (#200)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| LiveBench Math | — | 41.6% |
| LMArena Math | 1525 | — |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
Knowledge Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1318 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 41.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 70% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1513 | — |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | — |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | — |
| LMArena French | 1525 | — |
| LMArena German | 1500 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1543 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1534 | — |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1516 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Sonar: 71.4 (#150)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 76.2% |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | — |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Sonar: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | — |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Sonar: 52.6 (#167)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Sonar |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | — |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | — |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | — |
| LiveBench Language | — | 44.1% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Sonar?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 38.5 on the Noometry Index. Sonar costs 20× 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 Sonar?
Sonar is cheaper. It lists at $1 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 Sonar better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 35.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Fable 5.1 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Sonar share?
0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Sonar has 7.