Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 114× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.
GoogleSummary
- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 10 categories and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite in 0 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 76.7 to 22.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 92.9% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 35.2% for Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper at $0.10 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
- Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 37.0 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2025-06-17 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 66K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $0.10 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $0.40 |
| Results tracked | 52 | 33 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 74.7 (#1), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.5 (#173)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| WeirdML | 92.9% | 35.2% |
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1373 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | 325.9 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| GSO | 88.2% | — |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 28.0 (#96)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 68.6% | — |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | — | 36.9% |
| Remote Labor Index | 17.9% | — |
| GDP.pdf | 29.6% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,422 | — |
Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 22.2 (#205)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1377 |
| DTBench | 97.6% | 62.8% |
| LMCA | 65.5% | 18.1% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 164.7 | 133.94 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | — | 40.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 57.1% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 38.0 (#144)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1525 | 1373 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| Omni-MATH | — | 48% |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 32.5 (#210)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | 1373 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
| MMLU-Pro | — | 53.7% |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | — | 3.3% |
| GPQA (HELM) | — | 30.9% |
Multimodal Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 29.1 (#114)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1318 | 1198 |
| VPCT | — | 30% |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 41.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 70% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1513 | — |
Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 49.3 (#134)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 1369 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | 1404 |
| LMArena French | 1525 | 1388 |
| LMArena German | 1500 | 1389 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1543 | 1359 |
| LMArena Korean | 1534 | 1360 |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | 1373 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1516 | 1396 |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 70.0 (#168)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1367 |
| IFEval | — | 81% |
Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 33.3 (#262)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | 1373 |
| Fiction.LiveBench | — | 47.2% |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite: 56.8 (#135)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | 1379 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1367 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1366 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
| WildBench | — | 81.8% |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 37.0 on the Noometry Index. Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite costs 114× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper. It lists at $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 38.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite share?
23 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Gemini 2.5 Flash-Lite has 33.