Model comparison
Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 5
Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 5 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (66.8 vs 67.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Last verified . 54 shared benchmarks.
Summary
- They share 54 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5 scores higher in 2 categories and Claude Opus 5 in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in multimodal, where Claude Opus 5 leads 50.8 to 45.3.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Furniture Assembly: 35.8% for Claude Fable 5 and 60.8% for Claude Opus 5.
- Claude Opus 5 is cheaper at $5 / $25 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.
Side by side
| Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Noometry Index | 66.8 | 67.8 |
| Released | 2026-06-07 | 2026-07-24 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Max output | 128K | 128K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $10 | $5 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $50 | $25 |
| Results tracked | 62 | 57 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 70.6 (#4), Claude Opus 5: 67.5 (#5)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 69.9% | 73.6% |
| FrontierCode | 53.5% | 53.4% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1625 | 1691 |
| FrontierSWE | 47% | 52% |
| SciCode | 61% | 56.4% |
| WeirdML | 91.9% | 91.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1519 | 1534 |
| ALE-Bench | 2,041 | 2,165 |
| CursorBench | — | 46.6% |
| GSO | 78.4% | — |
| MirrorCode | 63.9% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 54.0 (#2), Claude Opus 5: 55.6 (#1)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 63.6% | 65.8% |
| τ²-bench Banking | 39.7% | 48.7% |
| PostTrainBench | 41.8% | 35% |
| GBAEval | 74.5% | 79.6% |
| GDP.pdf | 30% | 24% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,680 | 11,182 |
| OSWorld 2.0 | — | 31.4% |
| Remote Labor Index | 16.1% | — |
| BALROG | — | 63.4% |
| LMArena Search | 1230 | — |
Reasoning Too close to call
Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#6), Claude Opus 5: 77.2 (#4)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-2 | 89.2% | 90.4% |
| SimpleBench | 81.9% | 80.6% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 92.7% | 94.3% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | 97.5% |
| CritPt | 28.6% | 29.1% |
| Chess Puzzles | 41% | 42% |
| EBR-Bench | 39.5% | 45.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1508 | 1526 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 52% | 59% |
| DTBench | 98.4% | 97.9% |
| LMCA | 61.1% | 64.5% |
| Bench to the Future 3 | 0.13 | 0.12 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 162.06 | 162.78 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 91.4% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 39.3% | — |
| Surface Evolver Bench | 95% | — |
Math Claude Fable 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 88.5 (#5), Claude Opus 5: 86.2 (#8)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 87% | 85.6% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 90.2% | 73.2% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | 98.9% |
| ProofBench | 95% | 99% |
| LMArena Math | 1519 | 1531 |
| FrontierMath Erdős | 0% | — |
Knowledge Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 62.2 (#25), Claude Opus 5: 66.8 (#9)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 85.9% | 93.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.7% | 59.9% |
| LMArena Expert | 1534 | 1557 |
Multimodal Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 45.3 (#17), Claude Opus 5: 50.8 (#8)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1324 | 1319 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 38.6% | 30.4% |
| Furniture Assembly | 35.8% | 60.8% |
| LMArena Document | 1496 | 1516 |
Multilingual Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 57.3 (#9), Claude Opus 5: 58.8 (#4)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1481 | 1501 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1543 | 1574 |
| LMArena French | 1505 | 1519 |
| LMArena German | 1486 | 1524 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1506 | 1516 |
| LMArena Korean | 1488 | 1521 |
| LMArena Russian | 1504 | 1507 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1498 | 1519 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Claude Fable 5: 78.6 (#8), Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#7)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1502 | 1517 |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#23), Claude Opus 5: 46.5 (#21)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1509 | 1515 |
Writing & Preference Claude Opus 5 leads
Claude Fable 5: 75.9 (#5), Claude Opus 5: 79.2 (#1)
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1491 | 1507 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1494 | 1491 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1943 | 2133 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1340 | 1385 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1504 | 1499 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5 better than Claude Opus 5?
Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 5 score almost the same on the Noometry Index (66.8 vs 67.8), so choose on price, context window or the category you care about most.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 5?
Claude Opus 5 is cheaper. It lists at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5 lists at $10 and $50.
Is Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 5 better for coding?
Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 70.6 versus 67.5 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both accept 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 5 share?
54 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 62 scored results on Noometry and Claude Opus 5 has 57.