Noometry

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.5 35B-A3B

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B costs 29× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 25 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic

69.0

Rank #2 Confirmed

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B Alibaba (Qwen)

42.0

Rank #123 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 25 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B 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 24.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 47% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 10% for Qwen3.5 35B-A3B.
  • Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is cheaper at $0.25 / $2 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.1.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 262K.
  • Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
ProviderAnthropicAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index69.042.0
Released2026-09-012026-02-01
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M262K
Max output128K66K
Input $ / M tokens$10$0.25
Output $ / M tokens$50$2
Results tracked5228

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), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 33.8 (#251)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena WebDev17441254
SciCode63.1%29.3%
LMArena Coding15281410
FrontierCode50.9%—
CursorBench51.8%—
FrontierSWE56.3%—
GSO88.2%—
WeirdML92.9%—
MirrorCode73.3%—
ALE-Bench2,143—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 50.7 (#5), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
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), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 24.6 (#161)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
CritPt31.1%0.6%
Chess Puzzles47%10%
LMArena Hard Prompts15261400
DTBench97.6%80%
LMCA65.5%29.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7142.52
ARC-AGI-290%—
NYT Connections (extended)90%—
ARC-AGI-197.5%—
EBR-Bench57.1%—
Mystery Game Puzzles58%—

Math Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 89.6 (#4), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 39.9 (#97)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%70%
LMArena Math15251404
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)90.2%—
FrontierMath Tier 487.8%—
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions—56%
ProofBench100%—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 69.6 (#6), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 47.8 (#79)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Expert15351408
GPQA Diamond—83.5%
Humanity's Last Exam46.5%—
SimpleQA Verified70.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—10.5%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5.1: 53.9 (#4), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: —

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Vision1318—
Blueprint-Bench 241.9%—
Furniture Assembly70%—
LMArena Document1513—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 59.1 (#3), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 50.0 (#127)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Non-English15071378
LMArena Chinese15861457
LMArena French15251412
LMArena German15001367
LMArena Japanese15431325
LMArena Korean15341356
LMArena Russian15211376
LMArena Spanish15161392

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#6), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 72.8 (#128)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Instruction Following15171379

Long Context Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 46.7 (#20), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 42.4 (#127)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Longer Query15221389

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5.1 leads

Claude Fable 5.1: 79.2 (#2), Qwen3.5 35B-A3B: 57.9 (#124)

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Qwen3.5 35B-A3B
LMArena Text15101395
LMArena Creative Writing15071346
LMArena Multi-Turn14921390
EQ-Bench Creative Writing2162—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 69.0 to 42.0 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3.5 35B-A3B costs 29× 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 Qwen3.5 35B-A3B?

Qwen3.5 35B-A3B is cheaper. It lists at $0.25 per million input tokens and $2 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Qwen3.5 35B-A3B better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 74.7 versus 33.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5.1 does, with 1M tokens against 262K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5.1 and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B share?

25 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5.1 has 52 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.5 35B-A3B has 28.

Related comparisons

Go deeper