Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Hunyuan T1 20250711

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

Hunyuan T1 20250711 Tencent

42.5

Rank #114 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Hunyuan T1 20250711 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 38.7.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
ProviderAnthropicTencent
Noometry Index69.042.5
Released2026-09-01—
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$10—
Output $ / M tokens$50—
Results tracked5213

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), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 40.9 (#129)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
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), Hunyuan T1 20250711: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
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), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 28.5 (#103)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Hard Prompts15261399
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), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.7 (#130)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Math15251414
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), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 38.8 (#141)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Expert15351395
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Hunyuan T1 20250711: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 51.2 (#112)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Non-English15071395
LMArena Chinese15861425
LMArena Korean15341406
LMArena Russian15211385
LMArena French1525—
LMArena German1500—
LMArena Japanese1543—
LMArena Spanish1516—

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 72.6 (#138)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Instruction Following15171374

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 42.2 (#128)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Longer Query15221384

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Hunyuan T1 20250711: 59.5 (#109)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Hunyuan T1 20250711
LMArena Text15101401
LMArena Creative Writing15071392
LMArena Multi-Turn14921393
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Hunyuan T1 20250711?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 42.5 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Hunyuan T1 20250711 better for coding?

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

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Hunyuan T1 20250711 share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Hunyuan T1 20250711 has 13.

Related comparisons

Go deeper