Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3 235B-A22B

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 235B-A22B costs 16× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 34 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5 Anthropic

66.8

Rank #5 Confirmed

Qwen3 235B-A22B Alibaba (Qwen)

43.5

Rank #91 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 34 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5 scores higher in 9 categories and Qwen3 235B-A22B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Fable 5 leads 76.8 to 15.7.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ARC-AGI-2: 89.2% for Claude Fable 5 and 1.3% for Qwen3 235B-A22B.
  • Qwen3 235B-A22B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.
  • Claude Fable 5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3 235B-A22B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index66.843.5
Released2026-06-072025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M131K
Max output128K16K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$50$2.80
Results tracked6249

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), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 44.3 (#75)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
SciCode61%42.4%
WeirdML91.9%41%
LMArena Coding15191445
DeepSWE69.9%—
FrontierCode53.5%—
Aider Polyglot—59.6%
LMArena WebDev1625—
FrontierSWE47%—
GSO78.4%—
MirrorCode63.9%—
ALE-Bench2,041—

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 54.0 (#2), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 33.9 (#51)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
Vending-Bench 25,680-11.34
APEX-Agents63.6%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—52.1%
Remote Labor Index16.1%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
PostTrainBench41.8%—
GBAEval74.5%—
GDP.pdf30%—
LMArena Search1230—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#6), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 15.7 (#311)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
ARC-AGI-289.2%1.3%
SimpleBench81.9%31%
Kagi LLM Benchmark91.4%69.4%
ARC-AGI-198.5%11%
CritPt28.6%0%
Chess Puzzles41%12%
LMArena Hard Prompts15081433
Mystery Game Puzzles52%9%
DTBench98.4%80.3%
LMCA61.1%29.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index162.06143.85
NYT Connections (extended)92.7%—
EnigmaEval39.3%—
EBR-Bench39.5%—
Surface Evolver Bench95%—
Bench to the Future 30.13—
ForecastBench—59.7

Math Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 88.5 (#5), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 50.4 (#57)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%86.7%
LMArena Math15191432
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)87%—
FrontierMath Tier 490.2%—
ProofBench95%—
Omni-MATH—71.8%
MATH Level 5—68.9%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)—8.5%
FrontierMath Erdős0%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)—0%

Knowledge Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 62.2 (#25), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 49.6 (#73)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
GPQA Diamond85.9%80.1%
SimpleQA Verified70.7%40.4%
LMArena Expert15341463
MMLU-Pro—84.4%
Confabulations—15.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.3%
GPQA (HELM)—72.7%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 45.3 (#17), Qwen3 235B-A22B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Vision1324—
Blueprint-Bench 238.6%—
Furniture Assembly35.8%—
LMArena Document1496—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 57.3 (#9), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 52.3 (#89)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Non-English14811409
LMArena Chinese15431481
LMArena French15051445
LMArena German14861433
LMArena Japanese15061399
LMArena Korean14881391
LMArena Russian15041411
LMArena Spanish14981430

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 78.6 (#8), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 72.6 (#136)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Instruction Following15021408
IFEval—83.5%

Long Context Too close to call

Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#23), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 46.1 (#26)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Longer Query15091426
Fiction.LiveBench—75%

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 75.9 (#5), Qwen3 235B-A22B: 59.6 (#108)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3 235B-A22B
LMArena Text14911419
LMArena Creative Writing14941384
EQ-Bench Creative Writing19431366
LMArena Multi-Turn15041432
Short-Story Creative Writing—83%
WildBench—86.6%
EQ-Bench 41340—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5 better than Qwen3 235B-A22B?

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 43.5 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 235B-A22B costs 16× 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 Qwen3 235B-A22B?

Qwen3 235B-A22B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5 or Qwen3 235B-A22B better for coding?

Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.6 versus 44.3 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5 does, with 1M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5 and Qwen3 235B-A22B share?

34 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 62 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 235B-A22B has 49.

Related comparisons

Go deeper