Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs GLM-4.6V

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 44× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

GLM-4.6V Z.ai (Zhipu)

41.3

Rank #137 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and GLM-4.6V in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 76.7 to 27.6.
  • GLM-4.6V is cheaper at $0.30 / $0.90 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 128K.
  • GLM-4.6V has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
ProviderAnthropicZ.ai (Zhipu)
Noometry Index69.041.3
Released2026-09-012025-12-08
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M128K
Max output128K33K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.30
Output $ / M tokens$50$0.90
Results tracked5212

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), GLM-4.6V: 40.9 (#128)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
LMArena Coding15281390
FrontierCode50.9%—
CursorBench51.8%—
LMArena WebDev1744—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
SciCode63.1%—
GSO88.2%—
WeirdML92.9%—
MirrorCode73.3%—
ALE-Bench2,143—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), GLM-4.6V: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
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), GLM-4.6V: 27.6 (#115)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
LMArena Hard Prompts15261368
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 Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), GLM-4.6V: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1525—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), GLM-4.6V: 38.0 (#149)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
LMArena Expert15351371
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—

Multimodal Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), GLM-4.6V: 34.8 (#90)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
LMArena Vision13181164
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), GLM-4.6V: 48.6 (#141)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
LMArena Non-English15071359
LMArena Chinese15861425
LMArena Russian15211340
LMArena French1525—
LMArena German1500—
LMArena Japanese1543—
LMArena Korean1534—
LMArena Spanish1516—

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), GLM-4.6V: 71.4 (#151)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
LMArena Instruction Following15171352

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), GLM-4.6V: 41.3 (#143)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
LMArena Longer Query15221358

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), GLM-4.6V: 56.6 (#137)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1GLM-4.6V
LMArena Text15101377
LMArena Creative Writing15071347
LMArena Multi-Turn14921360
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than GLM-4.6V?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 41.3 on the Noometry Index. GLM-4.6V costs 44× 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 GLM-4.6V?

GLM-4.6V is cheaper. It lists at $0.30 per million input tokens and $0.90 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or GLM-4.6V better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 40.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5.1 does, with 1M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and GLM-4.6V share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and GLM-4.6V has 12.

Related comparisons

Go deeper