Model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Llama 2-7B
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Llama 2-7B 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 15.7.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 47% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 0% for Llama 2-7B.
- Llama 2-7B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 69.0 | 29.1 |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2023-07-18 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Open |
| Context window | 1M | — |
| Max output | 128K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | — |
| Results tracked | 52 | 29 |
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), Llama 2-7B: 29.2 (#307)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1002 |
| FrontierCode | 50.9% | — |
| CursorBench | 51.8% | — |
| LMArena WebDev | 1744 | — |
| FrontierSWE | 56.3% | — |
| SciCode | 63.1% | — |
| GSO | 88.2% | — |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | — |
| MirrorCode | 73.3% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 2,143 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Llama 2-7B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 68.6% | — |
| 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), Llama 2-7B: 15.7 (#312)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| Chess Puzzles | 47% | 0% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1526 | 1009 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 164.7 | 99.06 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 90% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | — |
| CritPt | 31.1% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 57.1% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 58% | — |
| DTBench | 97.6% | — |
| LMCA | 65.5% | — |
| BIG-Bench Hard | — | 39.2% |
| HellaSwag | — | 77.2% |
| LAMBADA | — | 73.3% |
| PIQA | — | 78.8% |
| WinoGrande | — | 69.2% |
Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Llama 2-7B: 30.7 (#233)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1525 | 1042 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 90.2% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| ProofBench | 100% | — |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
| GSM8K | — | 16.7% |
Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Llama 2-7B: 28.2 (#248)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1535 | 1036 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 46.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | — |
| ARC (AI2) Challenge | — | 45.9% |
| BoolQ | — | 77.9% |
| MMLU | — | 45.8% |
| OpenBookQA | — | 58.6% |
| TriviaQA | — | 73.7% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Llama 2-7B: —
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1318 | — |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 41.9% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 70% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1513 | — |
| ScienceQA | — | 43.1% |
Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Llama 2-7B: 23.8 (#293)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1507 | 973 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1586 | 973 |
| LMArena French | 1525 | 970 |
| LMArena German | 1500 | 978 |
| LMArena Russian | 1521 | 995 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1516 | 1007 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1543 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1534 | — |
Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Llama 2-7B: 50.8 (#298)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1517 | 1006 |
Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Llama 2-7B: 30.4 (#287)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1522 | 999 |
Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads
Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Llama 2-7B: 28.0 (#298)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama 2-7B |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1510 | 1053 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1507 | 1033 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1492 | 1029 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 2162 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Llama 2-7B?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 29.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 2-7B better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 29.2 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 2-7B share?
17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Llama 2-7B has 29.