Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemma 1.1 2b IT

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

Gemma 1.1 2b IT Google

29.3

Rank #313 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Gemma 1.1 2b IT in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 89.6 to 30.8.
  • Gemma 1.1 2b IT has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
ProviderAnthropicGoogle
Noometry Index69.029.3
Released2026-09-01—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$10—
Output $ / M tokens$50—
Results tracked5216

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), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.1 (#299)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Coding15281034
FrontierCode50.9%—
CursorBench51.8%—
LMArena WebDev1744—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
SciCode63.1%—
GSO88.2%—
WeirdML92.9%—
MirrorCode73.3%—
ALE-Bench2,143—
HumanEval+—17.7%
MBPP+—23.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
APEX-Agents68.6%—
Remote Labor Index17.9%—
GDP.pdf29.6%—
Vending-Bench 25,422—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 19.1 (#270)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Hard Prompts15261005
ARC-AGI-290%—
NYT Connections (extended)90%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.1%—
Chess Puzzles47%—
EBR-Bench57.1%—
Mystery Game Puzzles58%—
DTBench97.6%—
LMCA65.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7—

Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.8 (#232)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Math15251047
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 26.5 (#258)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Expert1535970
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 24.6 (#289)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Non-English1507988
LMArena Chinese15861012
LMArena German1500944
LMArena Korean1534899
LMArena Russian1521990
LMArena French1525—
LMArena Japanese1543—
LMArena Spanish1516—

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 49.9 (#299)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Instruction Following1517992

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 30.6 (#286)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Longer Query15221003

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Gemma 1.1 2b IT: 25.1 (#306)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemma 1.1 2b IT
LMArena Text15101022
LMArena Creative Writing1507998
LMArena Multi-Turn1492959
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Gemma 1.1 2b IT?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 29.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemma 1.1 2b IT better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 30.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 1.1 2b IT share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Gemma 1.1 2b IT has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper