Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 36× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 33 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5 Anthropic

66.8

Rank #5 Confirmed

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite Google

40.8

Rank #144 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 33 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5 scores higher in 10 categories and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Fable 5 leads 76.8 to 22.9.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is NYT Connections (extended): 92.7% for Claude Fable 5 and 8.2% for Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite.
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper at $0.25 / $1.50 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.
  • Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index66.840.8
Released2026-06-072026-03-03
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1.05M
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$50$1.50
Results tracked6238

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), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 37.8 (#188)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena WebDev16251256
SciCode61%41.9%
WeirdML91.9%52.2%
LMArena Coding15191400
ALE-Bench2,041797.73
DeepSWE69.9%—
FrontierCode53.5%—
FrontierSWE47%—
GSO78.4%—
MirrorCode63.9%—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 54.0 (#2), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 30.2 (#79)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
APEX-Agents63.6%—
Remote Labor Index16.1%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
DeepResearch Bench—37.3%
PostTrainBench41.8%—
GBAEval74.5%—
GDP.pdf30%—
LMArena Search1230—
Vending-Bench 25,680—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#6), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 22.9 (#186)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
Kagi LLM Benchmark91.4%67.2%
NYT Connections (extended)92.7%8.2%
CritPt28.6%1.1%
Chess Puzzles41%25%
EnigmaEval39.3%3%
LMArena Hard Prompts15081407
DTBench98.4%76.8%
LMCA61.1%35%
Epoch Capabilities Index162.06144.47
ARC-AGI-289.2%—
SimpleBench81.9%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
Thematic Generalization—63.3%
EBR-Bench39.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles52%—
Surface Evolver Bench95%—
Bench to the Future 30.13—
ForecastBench—54.4

Math Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 88.5 (#5), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 40.7 (#90)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)87%27.7%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%80%
LMArena Math15191428
FrontierMath Tier 490.2%—
ProofBench95%—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 62.2 (#25), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 41.9 (#104)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
GPQA Diamond85.9%81.8%
LMArena Expert15341398
Humanity's Last Exam—8.6%
SimpleQA Verified70.7%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—8.2%

Multimodal Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 45.3 (#17), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 39.4 (#60)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Vision13241240
Blueprint-Bench 238.6%—
Furniture Assembly35.8%—
LMArena Document1496—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 57.3 (#9), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 52.3 (#86)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Non-English14811411
LMArena Chinese15431461
LMArena French15051424
LMArena German14861429
LMArena Japanese15061413
LMArena Korean14881392
LMArena Russian15041420
LMArena Spanish14981421

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 78.6 (#8), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 72.7 (#131)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Instruction Following15021377

Long Context Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#23), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 42.5 (#122)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Longer Query15091394

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 75.9 (#5), Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite: 60.9 (#94)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite
LMArena Text14911416
LMArena Creative Writing14941401
LMArena Multi-Turn15041417
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1943—
EQ-Bench 41340—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5 better than Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 40.8 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite costs 36× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $1.50 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5 or Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite better for coding?

Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.6 versus 37.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5 and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite share?

33 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 62 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 3.1 Flash Lite has 38.

Related comparisons

Go deeper