Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Sonnet 5
Two Anthropic tiers compared on the figures that decide which one a workload actually needs.
Recorded profile verification October 1, 2026Individual provider fields may changeEvidence confidence: Medium — see receipts below
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Frontier
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5
Balanced
| Specification | Claude Fable 5.1 | Claude Sonnet 5 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | ||
| Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Tier | ||
| Tier | Frontier | Balanced |
| Context window | ||
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | ||
| Max output | 128K | 128K |
| Input / 1M tokens | ||
| Input / 1M tokens | $10 | Winner: $2 |
| Output / 1M tokens | ||
| Output / 1M tokens | $50 | Winner: $10 |
| Weights | ||
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Parameters | ||
| Parameters | Not verifiedUnverified | Not verifiedUnverified |
| Reasoning levels | ||
| Reasoning levels | low, medium, high, xhigh, max | low, medium, high, xhigh, max |
| Modalities | ||
| Modalities | text, image | text, image |
| API model id | ||
| API model id | claude-fable-5-1 | claude-sonnet-5 |
| Released | ||
| Released | September 1, 2026 | June 30, 2026 |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index [max] · source date Claude Fable 5.1: 2026-10-01 | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index [max] · source date Claude Fable 5.1: 2026-10-01 | 53 | Not verifiedUnverified |
| Humanity's Last Exam · source date Claude Fable 5.1: 2026-09-01, Claude Sonnet 5: 2026-06-30 (comparability not verified) | ||
| Humanity's Last Exam · source date Claude Fable 5.1: 2026-09-01, Claude Sonnet 5: 2026-06-30 (comparability not verified) | 65 | 57.4 |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 · source date Claude Fable 5.1: 2026-09-26 | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 · source date Claude Fable 5.1: 2026-09-26 | 91.4 | Not verifiedUnverified |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 · source date Claude Sonnet 5: 2026-06-30 | ||
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 · source date Claude Sonnet 5: 2026-06-30 | Not verifiedUnverified | 80.4 |
| DeepSWE 1.1 · source date Claude Fable 5.1: 2026-09-03 | ||
| DeepSWE 1.1 · source date Claude Fable 5.1: 2026-09-03 | 67.4 | Not verifiedUnverified |
| LiveBench · source date Claude Sonnet 5: 2026-09-05 | ||
| LiveBench · source date Claude Sonnet 5: 2026-09-05 | Not verifiedUnverified | 76 |
Dates beside benchmark scores refer to the linked source’s publication or capture date unless that source explicitly states when it measured the result. A shared URL alone does not establish comparable runs; unverified setups are marked. Prices are USD per million tokens at standard rates, excluding batch and caching discounts. Values we could not confirm from the provider are shown as “Not verified” rather than estimated.
Benchmark receipts
Where each score comes from, and how far it can be compared across models.
- Source date2026-10-01Artificial Analysis (Claude Fable 5.1 (max with fallback))
Composite index blending reasoning, knowledge, and coding evals into one 0–100 score.
Comparable with caveatOnly same-version scores are comparable. v4.3.2 was rebaselined (the top score fell from 66 on v4.1.1 to ~58), so v4.1.1 figures must not be compared with v4.3.2 figures — check the cited source and its date.
- Source date2026-09-26Artificial Analysis Terminal-Bench 2.1 (independent, Terminus 2, max effort)
Agentic terminal work: multi-step tasks executed in a sandboxed shell environment.
Comparable with caveatNot comparable with Terminal-Bench 3.0 or 4.0 (different task sets) or v1; harness configuration (container, time limits) also shifts results.
- Source date2026-09-05LiveBench official leaderboard (benchmark-owned), xhigh effort
Contamination-resistant general capability across reasoning, coding, math, data analysis, and language, with monthly question refreshes.
Comparable with caveatCompare only observations confirmed to use the same exact question-set version. Date proximity (including within one month) does not establish identical questions; when the version is unavailable, treat the scores as unaligned.
- Source date2026-09-03OpenAI GPT-6 Astra launch table quoting a cross-provider result; not a direct Datacurve row (Cross-provider quotation; Fable harness, effort and experiment date unverified)
Agentic software engineering: pass@1 on real repo tasks with reported cost per completed task.
Directly comparable
- Source date2026-09-01Anthropic Fable 5.1 announcement (vendor, with tools; 60.9 no tools) — Anthropic's later Opus 5.5 table lists 65.6; conflict preserved
Frontier-knowledge ceiling: extremely hard multi-domain questions written to be near-impossible without deep expertise.
Comparable with caveatSubset/tool configurations (text-only vs with-tools) differ between vendors and materially change scores; must match configuration to compare.
- Source date2026-06-30Anthropic announcement (vendor, with tools)
Frontier-knowledge ceiling: extremely hard multi-domain questions written to be near-impossible without deep expertise.
Comparable with caveatSubset/tool configurations (text-only vs with-tools) differ between vendors and materially change scores; must match configuration to compare.
- Source date2026-06-30Anthropic Claude Sonnet 5 system card, sections 8.1 and 8.3 (vendor-reported; mini-SWE-agent harness) (mini-SWE-agent; effort and experiment date not specified in the summary table)
Agentic terminal work: multi-step tasks executed in a sandboxed shell environment.
Comparable with caveatNot comparable with Terminal-Bench 3.0 or 4.0 (different task sets) or v1; harness configuration (container, time limits) also shifts results.
Pricing tiers
Claude Fable 5.1: Standard $10/$50 per MTok with no long-context surcharge. Cache reads $0.25, versus Fable 5's $1; 5-minute writes $12.50 and 1-hour writes $20. Batch $5/$25. US-only inference adds 10% where supported. Adaptive thinking is always on, default effort high; knowledge cutoff Jun 2026. Retirement not sooner than September 1, 2027.
Claude Sonnet 5: Standard $2/$10 per MTok with no long-context surcharge. Cache reads $0.20; 5-minute writes $2.50 and 1-hour writes $4. Batch $1/$5. US-only inference adds 10% where supported. Batch supports 300K output with output-300k-2026-03-24; standard stays 128K. Knowledge cutoff Jan 2026; retirement not sooner than June 30, 2027.
Claude Fable 5.1
Claude Fable 5.1 is Anthropic's model for the most demanding reasoning and long-horizon agentic work at $10/$50 — Anthropic now recommends Opus 5.5 as the default for most workloads.
Best for
- Frontier agents
- Hardest reasoning work
- Fable 5 workloads at the same price
Watch out
Standard token rates are 2.5x Opus 5.5's. Forced tool use errors; thinking blocks are model/conversation-bound, so editing earlier turns or switching models can invalidate them. Display updates and per-message effort are beta. Match benchmark settings and evaluate pinned workloads before migrating.
Claude Sonnet 5
Claude Sonnet 5 is Anthropic's previous Sonnet generation for high-volume agentic work at $2/$10.
Best for
- Everyday generation
- High-volume agents
- Cost-sensitive work
Watch out
Active legacy. Sonnet 5.5 launched September 28 at the same token price, with breaking changes to thinking, forced tool use, computer use, advisor choices and progress blocks. Sonnet 5 rejects non-default temperature/top_p/top_k; test the exact target model before switching.
When the cheaper one wins
Claude Sonnet 5 is cheaper on output at $10 per million tokens against $50 for Claude Fable 5.1 — about 5.0×. Use the cheaper tier for classification, extraction, summarisation, and any task where the expensive model’s extra score does not change the accepted output. The expensive one only pays if your hardest task actually fails on the cheap tier. This compares standard short-context token rates, not total cost per accepted task. Include input, cache, context tiers, schedules, retries and review in your pilot.
Run the model pickerEvidence confidence: Medium
How strong and complete the evidence behind this comparison is — not a prediction of which model is better.
- Pricing verified on both sides — Input and output rates are verified for both models.
- 4/5 core specs verified on both sides — Not published for at least one side: parameter count.
- No directly aligned benchmark setup — No benchmark has matching cited sources, source dates, units, effort and recorded run details on both models.
- Verified within the last 90 days — Older of the two catalog checks was 25 days ago.
- Both models carry source citations — Each side has at least two catalog sources on record.
Source receipts
Each catalog figure was checked against the provider or an independent second source on the date shown.
- Claude Fable 5.1: Claude model overview — whole-profile source check October 1 (accessed 2026-10-01)
- Claude Fable 5.1: Claude current API pricing, caching and inference geography (accessed 2026-10-01)
- Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic pricing — Fable 5.1/Mythos 5.1 $10/$50 (accessed 2026-09-03)
- Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic models overview — Fable 5.1 (1M context, 128K output) (accessed 2026-09-03)
- Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic — Claude Fable and Mythos 5.1 announcement (accessed 2026-09-26)
- Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic models overview — Opus 5.5 default; Fable 5.1 for demanding reasoning (accessed 2026-09-26)
- Claude Fable 5.1: Anthropic effort documentation (Fable 5.1 selectable effort) (accessed 2026-10-01)
- Claude Sonnet 5: Claude model overview — whole-profile source check October 1 (accessed 2026-10-01)
- Claude Sonnet 5: Claude current API pricing, caching and inference geography (accessed 2026-10-01)
- Claude Sonnet 5: Anthropic — Claude Sonnet 5 (accessed 2026-08-29)
- Claude Sonnet 5: Anthropic news — Claude Sonnet 5 (accessed 2026-08-29)
- Claude Sonnet 5: Current model documentation (accessed 2026-10-01)
- Claude Sonnet 5: Anthropic selectable effort levels (separate from adaptive thinking mode) (accessed 2026-10-01)
Related comparisons
- Amazon Nova 2 Lite vs Claude Sonnet 5
- Amazon Nova 2 Pro vs Claude Sonnet 5
- Base 1 vs Claude Sonnet 5
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Haiku 4.5
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Mythos 5.1
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5
Diving deeper on one model? Claude Fable 5.1 · Claude Sonnet 5
Common questions
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Sonnet 5
Answered from the verified figures on this page rather than general guidance.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Sonnet 5 cheaper for input?
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Sonnet 5 cheaper for output?
Which has the larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Sonnet 5?
Do Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Sonnet 5 support the same reasoning levels?
Should I use Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Sonnet 5?
Next step
Choosing between them
The verified figures that separate this pair, computed from the catalog rather than restated boilerplate.
- Input price: Claude Sonnet 5 costs $2 per 1M tokens versus $10 for Claude Fable 5.1 — a 5x difference at the headline tier.
- Positioning: Claude Fable 5.1 sits in the frontier tier, Claude Sonnet 5 in the balanced tier. Compare accuracy, reliability, latency, and cost on representative tasks before choosing.
Choosing a harness rather than a model — Cursor, Copilot, Claude Code, Windsurf, or Lovable? Compare agentic harnesses · Latest releases.