Model comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Phi-3.5-MoE

Claude Fable 5 has enough public results to be ranked (#5); Phi-3.5-MoE does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5 Anthropic

66.3

Rank #5 Confirmed

Phi-3.5-MoE Microsoft

—

Unranked

Summary

  • Phi-3.5-MoE has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Claude Fable 5 and Phi-3.5-MoE specifications
Claude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
ProviderAnthropicMicrosoft
Noometry Index66.3—
Released2026-06-072024-08-17
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1M—
Max output128K—
Input $ / M tokens$10—
Output $ / M tokens$50—
Results tracked613

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 67.0 (#4), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
DeepSWE69.9%—
FrontierCode53.5%—
LMArena WebDev1626—
FrontierSWE47%—
SciCode61%—
WeirdML91.9%—
LMArena Coding1519—
MirrorCode63.9%—
ALE-Bench2,041—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 54.1 (#2), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
APEX-Agents63.6%—
Remote Labor Index16.1%—
τ²-bench Banking39.7%—
PostTrainBench41.8%—
GBAEval74.5%—
GDP.pdf30%—
LMArena Search1230—
Vending-Bench 25,680—

Reasoning Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 76.8 (#4), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
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%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1508—
Mystery Game Puzzles52%—
DTBench98.4%—
LMCA61.1%—
Surface Evolver Bench95%—
Bench to the Future 30.13—
Epoch Capabilities Index163.6—
PIQA—88.6%

Math Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 88.4 (#5), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)87%—
FrontierMath Tier 490.2%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025100%—
ProofBench95%—
LMArena Math1519—
FrontierMath Erdős0%—
GSM8K—88.7%

Knowledge Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 62.3 (#22), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
GPQA Diamond85.9%—
SimpleQA Verified70.7%—
LMArena Expert1534—
BoolQ—84.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 45.6 (#14), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Vision1326—
Blueprint-Bench 238.6%—
Furniture Assembly35.8%—
LMArena Document1496—

Multilingual Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 57.6 (#8), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Non-English1483—
LMArena Chinese1546—
LMArena French1509—
LMArena German1486—
LMArena Japanese1507—
LMArena Korean1493—
LMArena Russian1507—
LMArena Spanish1503—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 78.8 (#7), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Instruction Following1503—

Long Context Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 46.3 (#22), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Longer Query1510—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Claude Fable 5: 76.1 (#5), Phi-3.5-MoE: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Phi-3.5-MoE
LMArena Text1491—
LMArena Creative Writing1494—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1943—
EQ-Bench 41340—
LMArena Multi-Turn1505—

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5 better than Phi-3.5-MoE?

Claude Fable 5 has enough public results to be ranked (#5); Phi-3.5-MoE does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Claude Fable 5 and Phi-3.5-MoE share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Fable 5 has 61 scored results on Noometry and Phi-3.5-MoE has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper