Apodex 1.1 vs Claude Fable 5
Wins 0 of 6 areas
—
Wins 6 of 6 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Images and charts · Long documents
Claude Fable 5 is the stronger all-rounder.Apodex 1.1 is cheaper.
Scores updated · 17 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the six areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own04Claude Fable 54 of 4 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking03Claude Fable 53 of 3 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software02Claude Fable 52 of 2 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up02Claude Fable 52 of 2 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video01Claude Fable 51 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Claude Fable 51 of 1 test
Images and charts and long documents rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Apodex 1.1 costs 95% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Fable 5 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+33.7points ahead
- Research-level physics problemsCritPt+24points ahead
- Very hard expert questions across many subjectsHumanity's Last Exam+21.4points ahead
Where Apodex 1.1 pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
Every test, side by side
All 17 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Fable 5
- SciCodeClaude Fable 5 by 15.545.561+15.5
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Claude Fable 5 by 14.969.784.6+14.9
AgentsClaude Fable 5
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Claude Fable 5 by 42.4042.4+42.4
- GDPValClaude Fable 5 by 20.934.655.5+20.9
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingClaude Fable 5 by 12.925.238.1+12.9
- AA ApexAgentsClaude Fable 5 by 12.131.243.3+12.1
ReasoningClaude Fable 5
- CritPtClaude Fable 5 by 244.628.6+24
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Fable 5 by 21.434.155.5+21.4
- GPQA DiamondClaude Fable 5 by 6.286.492.6+6.2
FactsClaude Fable 5
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Fable 5 by 33.731.765.3+33.7
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Fable 5 by 14.821.636.4+14.8
Other results4 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Fable 5 by 65.2-21.943.3+65.2
- AA IntelligenceClaude Fable 5 by 23.226.449.6+23.2
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Fable 5 by 15.760.876.5+15.7
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Fable 5 by 14.436.651+14.4
Questions people ask
Which is better, Apodex 1.1 or Claude Fable 5?
Claude Fable 5 wins all six areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, images and charts and long documents. Apodex 1.1 wins none, but costs 95% less.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Fable 5. It wins 2 of the 2 coding tests both models report; Apodex 1.1 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Apodex 1.1 costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $3.00 per million output tokens; Claude Fable 5 costs $10.00 and $50.00. That makes Apodex 1.1 about 95% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 17 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 13 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 4 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.