Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Llama 2-34B

Claude Fable 5.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#2); Llama 2-34B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

Llama 2-34B Meta

—

Unranked

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
ProviderAnthropicMeta
Noometry Index69.0—
Released2026-09-012023-07-18
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$10—
Output $ / M tokens$50—
Results tracked5210

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 74.7 (#1), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
FrontierCode50.9%—
CursorBench51.8%—
LMArena WebDev1744—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
SciCode63.1%—
GSO88.2%—
WeirdML92.9%—
LMArena Coding1528—
MirrorCode73.3%—
ALE-Bench2,143—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
APEX-Agents68.6%—
Remote Labor Index17.9%—
GDP.pdf29.6%—
Vending-Bench 25,422—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 76.7 (#7), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7105.2
ARC-AGI-290%—
NYT Connections (extended)90%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
CritPt31.1%—
Chess Puzzles47%—
EBR-Bench57.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1526—
Mystery Game Puzzles58%—
DTBench97.6%—
LMCA65.5%—
BIG-Bench Hard—44.1%
PIQA—81.9%
WinoGrande—76.7%

Math Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
LMArena Math1525—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—
GSM8K—42.2%

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—
LMArena Expert1535—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—54.5%
BoolQ—83.7%
MMLU—62.6%
OpenBookQA—58.2%
TriviaQA—84.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
LMArena Non-English1507—
LMArena Chinese1586—
LMArena French1525—
LMArena German1500—
LMArena Japanese1543—
LMArena Korean1534—
LMArena Russian1521—
LMArena Spanish1516—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
LMArena Instruction Following1517—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
LMArena Longer Query1522—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Llama 2-34B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Llama 2-34B
LMArena Text1510—
LMArena Creative Writing1507—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—
LMArena Multi-Turn1492—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Llama 2-34B?

Claude Fable 5.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#2); Llama 2-34B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 2-34B share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-34B has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper