Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Olmo 7b Instruct

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 10 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

Olmo 7b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

30.3

Rank #295 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 10 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 6 categories and Olmo 7b Instruct in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5.1 leads 89.6 to 30.2.
  • Olmo 7b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
ProviderAnthropicAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index69.030.3
Released2026-09-01—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
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 Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 74.7 (#1), Olmo 7b Instruct: 29.6 (#303)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Coding15281016
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), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
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), Olmo 7b Instruct: 18.8 (#274)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts1526993
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), Olmo 7b Instruct: 30.2 (#237)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Math15251018
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—
LMArena Expert1535—

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Olmo 7b Instruct: 24.0 (#291)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Non-English1507977
LMArena Chinese15861014
LMArena Russian1521947
LMArena French1525—
LMArena German1500—
LMArena Japanese1543—
LMArena Korean1534—
LMArena Spanish1516—

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Olmo 7b Instruct: 49.0 (#301)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following1517978

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Olmo 7b Instruct: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1522—

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Olmo 7b Instruct: 25.8 (#303)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Olmo 7b Instruct
LMArena Text15101032
LMArena Creative Writing1507990
LMArena Multi-Turn14921007
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Olmo 7b Instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 30.3 on the Noometry Index.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Olmo 7b Instruct better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 29.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Olmo 7b Instruct share?

10 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 7b Instruct has 10.

Related comparisons

Go deeper