# Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.6

> Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 58.2 on the Noometry Index. Claude Opus 4.6 costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/claude-fable-5-vs-claude-opus-4-6
- Last updated: 2026-10-12
- Shared benchmarks: 51

## Summary

- They share 51 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5 scores higher in 7 categories and Claude Opus 4.6 in 3 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5 leads 88.5 to 63.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is FrontierMath Tier 4: 90.2% for Claude Fable 5 and 26.8% for Claude Opus 4.6.
- Claude Opus 4.6 is cheaper at $5 / $25 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.

## Snapshot

| | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Noometry Index | 66.8 | 58.2 |
| Rank | 5 | 20 |
| Context | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/M | $10 | $5 |
| Output $/M | $50 | $25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- Claude Fable 5: 70.6 (#4)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 57.2 (#20)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierCode | 53.5% | 26.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1625 | 1547 |
| GSO | 78.4% | 41.2% |
| WeirdML | 91.9% | 78% |
| LMArena Coding | 1519 | 1536 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,041 | 996.5 |
| SWE-bench Verified | — | 78.7% |
| DeepSWE | 69.9% | — |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | — | 75.6% |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | — | 72% |
| FrontierSWE | 47% | — |
| SciCode | 61% | — |
| MirrorCode | 63.9% | — |
| AlgoTune | — | 1.47 |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- Claude Fable 5: 54.0 (#2)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 51.1 (#4)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 63.6% | 46.3% |
| Remote Labor Index | 16.1% | 4.2% |
| τ²-bench Banking | 39.7% | 27.3% |
| GBAEval | 74.5% | 44.1% |
| LMArena Search | 1230 | 1253 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,680 | 8,018 |
| Terminal-Bench | — | 79.8% |
| Cybench | — | 93% |
| DeepResearch Bench | — | 55.3% |
| PostTrainBench | 41.8% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 30% | — |
| METR Time Horizons | — | 78.9% |

## Reasoning

- Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#6)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 57.8 (#23)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 89.2% | 69.2% |
| SimpleBench | 81.9% | 67.6% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 91.4% | 83.6% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 92.7% | 92.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | 94% |
| Chess Puzzles | 41% | 17% |
| EnigmaEval | 39.3% | 7.6% |
| EBR-Bench | 39.5% | 12.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1508 | 1527 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 52% | 25% |
| DTBench | 98.4% | 91.2% |
| LMCA | 61.1% | 55.8% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.06 | 155.24 |
| CritPt | 28.6% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | — | 80.6% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 95% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.13 | — |
| ForecastBench | — | 60 |

## Math

- Claude Fable 5: 88.5 (#5)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 63.0 (#31)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 87% | 66% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 90.2% | 26.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 94.4% |
| ProofBench | 95% | 50% |
| LMArena Math | 1519 | 1519 |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | — | 78.5% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 40.7% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 22.9% |

## Knowledge

- Claude Fable 5: 62.2 (#25)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 61.9 (#26)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.9% | 90.5% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.7% | 47% |
| LMArena Expert | 1534 | 1546 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 34.4% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 12.2% |

## Multimodal

- Claude Fable 5: 45.3 (#17)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 37.3 (#74)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1324 | 1316 |
| Furniture Assembly | 35.8% | 28.3% |
| LMArena Document | 1496 | 1507 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 38.6% | — |

## Multilingual

- Claude Fable 5: 57.3 (#9)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 57.9 (#6)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1481 | 1489 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1543 | 1551 |
| LMArena French | 1505 | 1513 |
| LMArena German | 1486 | 1502 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1506 | 1484 |
| LMArena Korean | 1488 | 1464 |
| LMArena Russian | 1504 | 1497 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1498 | 1510 |

## Instruction Following

- Claude Fable 5: 78.6 (#8)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 79.5 (#4)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1502 | 1523 |

## Long Context

- Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#23)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 48.1 (#13)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1509 | 1520 |
| CL-bench | — | 20.7% |
| CL-bench Life | — | 17% |

## Writing & Preference

- Claude Fable 5: 75.9 (#5)
- Claude Opus 4.6: 73.5 (#10)

| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | 1503 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1494 | 1505 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1943 | 1809 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1340 | 1223 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1504 | 1513 |

## FAQ

### Is Claude Fable 5 better than Claude Opus 4.6?

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.8 to 58.2 on the Noometry Index. Claude Opus 4.6 costs 2.0× 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 Claude Opus 4.6?

Claude Opus 4.6 is cheaper. It lists at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5 lists at $10 and $50.

### Is Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.6 better for coding?

Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.6 versus 57.2 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Both accept 1M tokens.

### How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 4.6 share?

51 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 62 scored results on Noometry and Claude Opus 4.6 has 68.