# Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite

> Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 37.8 on the Noometry Index.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-fable-5-1-vs-gemini-2-0-flash-lite
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 19

## Summary

- They share 19 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 9 categories and Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 89.6 to 34.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 97.6% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 52.5% for Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Google |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 37.8 |
| Rank | 2 | 194 |
| Context | 1M | — |
| Input $/M | $10 | — |
| Output $/M | $50 | — |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Fable 5.1: 74.7 (#1)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 37.9 (#185)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1322 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| GSO | 88.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | — |
| LiveBench Coding | — | 47.1% |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: —

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 68.6% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 17.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 29.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,422 | — |

## Reasoning

- Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 22.0 (#210)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1324 |
| DTBench | 97.6% | 52.5% |
| 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 | — | 50.1% |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | — | 65.5% |
| LMCA | 65.5% | — |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 164.7 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 57.1 |
| LiveBench | — | 54.3% |

## Math

- Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 34.1 (#196)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1525 | 1309 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 37.4% |
| LiveBench Math | — | 58.1% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |

## Knowledge

- Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 35.0 (#189)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | 1305 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 72% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 50% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 31.2 (#109)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1318 | 1100 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 41.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 70% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1513 | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 46.0 (#161)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1323 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | 1339 |
| LMArena French | 1525 | 1347 |
| LMArena German | 1500 | 1306 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1543 | 1301 |
| LMArena Korean | 1534 | 1325 |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | 1328 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1516 | 1313 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 70.4 (#163)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1305 |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | — | 78.3% |
| IFEval | — | 82.4% |

## Long Context

- Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 40.1 (#160)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | 1320 |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2)
- Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite: 51.7 (#177)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | 1330 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1319 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1307 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
| WildBench | — | 79% |
| LiveBench Language | — | 34.3% |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 37.8 on the Noometry Index.

### Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 37.9 in the Noometry coding category.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite share?

19 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.0 Flash-Lite has 32.