Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 4.7
Wins 7 of 8 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 8 areas
—
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger all-rounder.Claude Opus 4.7 is cheaper.
Both rank among the ten best models we track in coding.
Scores updated · 38 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software70Claude Fable 5.17 of 7 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking60Claude Fable 5.16 of 6 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own30Claude Fable 5.13 of 3 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math30Claude Fable 5.13 of 3 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up21Claude Fable 5.12 of 3 tests
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Fable 5.11 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked10Claude Fable 5.11 of 1 test
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video00Even0 each · 1 tie
Images and charts, long documents and following instructions 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.
Claude Opus 4.7 costs 50% 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 5.1 pulls ahead
- Extremely hard research-level math problemsFrontierMath Tier 4+56.1points ahead
- Common-sense trick questionsSimpleBench+24.9points ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+20.1points ahead
Where Claude Opus 4.7 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+30.3points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 38 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Fable 5.1
- LMArena · WebDevClaude Fable 5.1 by 184 rating points17421558+184 rating
- SWE-bench ProClaude Fable 5.1 by 16.981.264.3+16.9
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingClaude Fable 5.1 by 15.466.150.7+15.4
- SciCodeClaude Fable 5.1 by 8.663.154.5+8.6
- SWE-bench MultilingualClaude Fable 5.1 by 8.689.180.5+8.6
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Claude Fable 5.1 by 8.391.483.1+8.3
- LiveBench · CodingClaude Fable 5.1 by 4.386.482.1+4.3
AgentsClaude Fable 5.1
- GDPValClaude Fable 5.1 by 20.162.742.6+20.1
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingClaude Fable 5.1 by 12.647.234.6+12.6
- AA IT-Bench SREClaude Fable 5.1 by 2.849.546.7+2.8
ReasoningClaude Fable 5.1
- SimpleBenchClaude Fable 5.1 by 24.986.661.7+24.9
- CritPtClaude Fable 5.1 by 17.729.712+17.7
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Fable 5.1 by 16.859.142.3+16.8
- ARC-AGI-2Claude Fable 5.1 by 14.29075.8+14.2
- LiveBench · ReasoningClaude Fable 5.1 by 4.591.787.2+4.5
- GPQA DiamondClaude Fable 5.1 by 2.393.791.4+2.3
FactsClaude Fable 5.1
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Opus 4.7 by 30.327.457.7+30.3
- SimpleQA VerifiedClaude Fable 5.1 by 19.170.851.7+19.1
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Fable 5.1 by 18.367.248.9+18.3
MathClaude Fable 5.1
- FrontierMath Tier 4Claude Fable 5.1 by 56.187.831.7+56.1
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)Claude Fable 5.1 by 2090.270.2+20
- LiveBench · MathematicsClaude Fable 5.1 by 4.19792.8+4.1
Following instructionsClaude Fable 5.1
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingClaude Fable 5.1 by 6.37366.7+6.3
Other results13 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.
- SWE-bench MultimodalClaude Fable 5.1 by 20.254.734.5+20.2
- HiL-Bench (Tools-allowed)Claude Fable 5.1 by 19.861.541.7+19.8
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Fable 5.1 by 18.55839.5+18.5
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Fable 5.1 by 16.243.527.3+16.2
- AA IntelligenceClaude Fable 5.1 by 12.753.440.7+12.7
- livebench_languageClaude Fable 5.1 by 11.689.577.9+11.6
- OfficeQA ProClaude Opus 4.7 by 11.66980.6+11.6
- HLE (with tools)Claude Fable 5.1 by 10.965.654.7+10.9
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Fable 5.1 by 881.673.6+8
- OfficeQAClaude Opus 4.7 by 6.180.286.3+6.1
- ARC-AGI-1Claude Fable 5.1 by 5.597.592+5.5
- livebench_data_analysisClaude Fable 5.1 by 280.378.3+2
- GDPval-AA (Elo)Claude Opus 4.7 by 18 rating points17351753+18 rating
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Opus 4.7?
Claude Fable 5.1 wins seven of the eight areas we test: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, math, long documents and following instructions. Claude Opus 4.7 wins none, but costs 50% less. They are level on images and charts.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1. It wins 7 of the 7 coding tests both models report; Claude Opus 4.7 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00 per million input tokens and $50.00 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 4.7 costs $5.00 and $25.00. That makes Claude Opus 4.7 about 50% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 38 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 25 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 13 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.