Model comparison
Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.1
Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 41.0 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 33 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 33 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5 scores higher in 10 categories and Claude Opus 4.1 in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5 leads 88.5 to 22.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath Tier 4: 90.2% for Claude Fable 5 and 2.4% for Claude Opus 4.1.
- Claude Fable 5 is cheaper at $10 / $50 per million input/output tokens, against $15 / $75 for Claude Opus 4.1.
- Claude Fable 5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 200K.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Noometry Index | 66.8 | 41.0 |
| Released | 2026-06-07 | 2025-08-05 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 200K |
| Max output | 128K | 32K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $15 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $75 |
| Results tracked | 62 | 48 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 70.6 (#4), Claude Opus 4.1: 44.4 (#73)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1625 | 1390 |
| WeirdML | 91.9% | 45.9% |
| LMArena Coding | 1519 | 1479 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,041 | 674.77 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 73.3% |
| DeepSWE | 69.9% | — |
| FrontierCode | 53.5% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 47% | — |
| SciCode | 61% | — |
| GSO | 78.4% | — |
| MirrorCode | 63.9% | — |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.34 |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 54.0 (#2), Claude Opus 4.1: 35.0 (#41)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Search | 1230 | 1148 |
| Terminal-Bench | — | 38% |
| APEX-Agents | 63.6% | — |
| GDPval | — | 43.6% |
| Remote Labor Index | 16.1% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 39.7% | — |
| Cybench | — | 42% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 48.3% |
| PostTrainBench | 41.8% | — |
| GBAEval | 74.5% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 66.8% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,680 | — |
Reasoning Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#6), Claude Opus 4.1: 32.2 (#76)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 81.9% | 60% |
| Chess Puzzles | 41% | 7% |
| EnigmaEval | 39.3% | 7.2% |
| EBR-Bench | 39.5% | 7.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1508 | 1443 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 52% | 21% |
| DTBench | 98.4% | 80% |
| LMCA | 61.1% | 37.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.06 | 144.12 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 89.2% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 91.4% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 92.7% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| CritPt | 28.6% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 95% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.13 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 62 |
Math Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 88.5 (#5), Claude Opus 4.1: 22.3 (#277)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 87% | 12.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 90.2% | 2.4% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 68.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1519 | 1431 |
| ProofBench | 95% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 7.2% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 4.2% |
Knowledge Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 62.2 (#25), Claude Opus 4.1: 42.0 (#101)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.9% | 77.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1534 | 1439 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 11.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.7% | — |
| Confabulations | — | 17.1% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 11.8% |
Multimodal Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 45.3 (#17), Claude Opus 4.1: 26.8 (#119)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1324 | — |
| VPCT | — | 35% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 38.6% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 35.8% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1496 | — |
Multilingual Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 57.3 (#9), Claude Opus 4.1: 52.0 (#95)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1481 | 1405 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1543 | 1427 |
| LMArena French | 1505 | 1431 |
| LMArena German | 1486 | 1413 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1506 | 1378 |
| LMArena Korean | 1488 | 1380 |
| LMArena Russian | 1504 | 1422 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1498 | 1448 |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 78.6 (#8), Claude Opus 4.1: 75.6 (#58)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1502 | 1435 |
Long Context Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#23), Claude Opus 4.1: 44.5 (#63)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1509 | 1455 |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 75.9 (#5), Claude Opus 4.1: 62.4 (#74)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | 1419 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1494 | 1412 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1504 | 1444 |
| Short-Story Creative Writing | — | 84.7% |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1943 | — |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1340 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5 better than Claude Opus 4.1?
Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 41.0 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.1?
Claude Fable 5 is cheaper. It lists at $10 per million input tokens and $50 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.1 lists at $15 and $75.
Is Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.1 better for coding?
Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.6 versus 44.4 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Fable 5 does, with 1M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 4.1 share?
33 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 62 scored results on Noometry and Claude Opus 4.1 has 48.