Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 43.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct costs 23× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 18 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5 Anthropic

66.8

Rank #5 Confirmed

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

43.0

Rank #102 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 18 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5 leads 88.5 to 38.8.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Kagi LLM Benchmark: 91.4% for Claude Fable 5 and 66.7% for Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct.
  • Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is cheaper at $0.50 / $2 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.
  • Claude Fable 5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index66.843.0
Released2026-06-072025-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M131K
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.50
Output $ / M tokens$50$2
Results tracked6225

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-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 42.5 (#98)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Coding15191440
DeepSWE69.9%—
FrontierCode53.5%—
LMArena WebDev1625—
FrontierSWE47%—
SciCode61%—
GSO78.4%—
WeirdML91.9%—
MirrorCode63.9%—
ALE-Bench2,041—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 54.0 (#2), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
APEX-Agents63.6%—
Remote Labor Index16.1%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
PostTrainBench41.8%—
GBAEval74.5%—
GDP.pdf30%—
LMArena Search1230—
Vending-Bench 25,680—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#6), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 31.1 (#81)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
Kagi LLM Benchmark91.4%66.7%
LMArena Hard Prompts15081428
ARC-AGI-289.2%—
SimpleBench81.9%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.7%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
CritPt28.6%—
Chess Puzzles41%—
EnigmaEval39.3%—
EBR-Bench39.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles52%—
DTBench98.4%—
LMCA61.1%—
Surface Evolver Bench95%—
Bench to the Future 30.13—
Epoch Capabilities Index162.06—

Math Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 88.5 (#5), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 38.8 (#126)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Math15191440
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)87%—
FrontierMath Tier 490.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench95%—
Omni-MATH—46.7%
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 62.2 (#25), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 41.8 (#106)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Expert15341417
GPQA Diamond85.9%—
SimpleQA Verified70.7%—
MMLU-Pro—78.6%
Vectara Hallucination Rate—9.3%
GPQA (HELM)—63%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 45.3 (#17), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Vision1324—
Blueprint-Bench 238.6%—
Furniture Assembly35.8%—
LMArena Document1496—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 57.3 (#9), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 52.1 (#93)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Non-English14811407
LMArena Chinese15431460
LMArena French15051413
LMArena German14861417
LMArena Japanese15061395
LMArena Korean14881364
LMArena Russian15041404
LMArena Spanish14981435

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 78.6 (#8), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 70.8 (#159)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following15021389
IFEval—81%

Long Context Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#23), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 37.0 (#223)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query15091403
Fiction.LiveBench—55.6%

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 75.9 (#5), Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct: 58.0 (#121)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct
LMArena Text14911417
LMArena Creative Writing14941334
LMArena Multi-Turn15041416
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1943—
WildBench—80.7%
EQ-Bench 41340—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5 better than Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 43.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct costs 23× 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-Next 80B-A3B Instruct?

Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.50 per million input tokens and $2 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5 or Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct better for coding?

Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.6 versus 42.5 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-Next 80B-A3B Instruct share?

18 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 62 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3-Next 80B-A3B Instruct has 25.

Related comparisons

Go deeper