Model comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Mixtral 8x22B

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.3 to 26.7 on the Noometry Index. Mixtral 8x22B costs 6.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5 Anthropic

66.3

Rank #5 Confirmed

Mixtral 8x22B Mistral AI

26.7

Rank #330 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Fable 5 scores higher in 9 categories and Mixtral 8x22B in 0 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Claude Fable 5 leads 88.4 to 21.2.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 91.9% for Claude Fable 5 and 3.2% for Mixtral 8x22B.
  • Mixtral 8x22B is cheaper at $2 / $6 per million input/output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.
  • Claude Fable 5 accepts more context: 1M tokens versus 64K.
  • Mixtral 8x22B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5 and Mixtral 8x22B specifications
Claude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
ProviderAnthropicMistral AI
Noometry Index66.326.7
Released2026-06-072024-04-17
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M64K
Max output128K64K
Input $ / M tokens$10$2
Output $ / M tokens$50$6
Results tracked6134

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

Category by category

Coding Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 67.0 (#4), Mixtral 8x22B: 23.8 (#324)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
WeirdML91.9%3.2%
LMArena Coding15191166
DeepSWE69.9%—
FrontierCode53.5%—
LMArena WebDev1626—
FrontierSWE47%—
SciCode61%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—40.6%
MirrorCode63.9%—
BigCodeBench Complete—50.2%
ALE-Bench2,041—
HumanEval+—72%
MBPP+—64.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 54.1 (#2), Mixtral 8x22B: 22.8 (#119)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
APEX-Agents63.6%—
Remote Labor Index16.1%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
Cybench—7.5%
PostTrainBench41.8%—
GBAEval74.5%—
GDP.pdf30%—
LMArena Search1230—
Vending-Bench 25,680—

Reasoning Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#4), Mixtral 8x22B: 19.1 (#246)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
LMArena Hard Prompts15081150
DTBench98.4%55.1%
Epoch Capabilities Index163.6122
ARC-AGI-289.2%—
SimpleBench81.9%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark91.4%—
NYT Connections (extended)92.7%—
ARC-AGI-198.5%—
CritPt28.6%—
Chess Puzzles41%—
EnigmaEval39.3%—
EBR-Bench39.5%—
Mystery Game Puzzles52%—
LMCA61.1%—
Surface Evolver Bench95%—
Bench to the Future 30.13—
ForecastBench—56.3

Math Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 88.4 (#5), Mixtral 8x22B: 21.2 (#271)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
LMArena Math15191184
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)87%—
FrontierMath Tier 490.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench95%—
Omni-MATH—16.3%
MATH Level 5—24.2%
FrontierMath Erdős0%—

Knowledge Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 62.3 (#22), Mixtral 8x22B: 15.1 (#288)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
GPQA Diamond85.9%34.1%
LMArena Expert15341113
SimpleQA Verified70.7%—
MMLU-Pro—46%
GPQA (HELM)—33.4%
MMLU—77.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 45.6 (#14), Mixtral 8x22B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
LMArena Vision1326—
Blueprint-Bench 238.6%—
Furniture Assembly35.8%—
LMArena Document1496—

Multilingual Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 57.6 (#8), Mixtral 8x22B: 32.9 (#250)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
LMArena Non-English14831128
LMArena Chinese15461116
LMArena French15091165
LMArena German14861141
LMArena Japanese15071037
LMArena Korean14931056
LMArena Russian15071158
LMArena Spanish15031150

Instruction Following Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 78.8 (#7), Mixtral 8x22B: 57.9 (#261)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
LMArena Instruction Following15031147
IFEval—72.4%

Long Context Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#22), Mixtral 8x22B: 34.6 (#242)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
LMArena Longer Query15101144

Writing & Preference Claude Fable 5 leads

Claude Fable 5: 76.1 (#5), Mixtral 8x22B: 37.1 (#257)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Mixtral 8x22B
LMArena Text14911162
LMArena Creative Writing14941141
LMArena Multi-Turn15051130
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1943—
WildBench—71.1%
EQ-Bench 41340—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5 better than Mixtral 8x22B?

Claude Fable 5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 66.3 to 26.7 on the Noometry Index. Mixtral 8x22B costs 6.7× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Fable 5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Mixtral 8x22B?

Mixtral 8x22B is cheaper. It lists at $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5 lists at $10 and $50.

Is Claude Fable 5 or Mixtral 8x22B better for coding?

Claude Fable 5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 67.0 versus 23.8 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5 does, with 1M tokens against 64K.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5 and Mixtral 8x22B share?

21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 61 scored results on Noometry and Mixtral 8x22B has 34.

Related comparisons

Go deeper