Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash
Wins 7 of 7 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents · Following instructions
Wins 0 of 7 areas
—
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger all-rounder.DeepSeek-V4-Flash is cheaper.
Scores updated · 38 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the seven 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.
- 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 own40Claude Fable 5.14 of 4 tests
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up30Claude Fable 5.13 of 3 tests
- MathCompetition and research-level math30Claude Fable 5.13 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
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.
DeepSeek-V4-Flash costs 99% 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+63.4points ahead
- Common-sense trick questionsSimpleBench+40.3points ahead
- Complex command-line tasks across many fieldsTerminal-Bench 4.0+39.9points ahead
Where DeepSeek-V4-Flash pulls ahead
No clear win on a test scored out of 100.
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 311 rating points17421431+311 rating
- SWE-bench ProClaude Fable 5.1 by 28.681.252.6+28.6
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingClaude Fable 5.1 by 19.366.146.8+19.3
- SWE-bench MultilingualClaude Fable 5.1 by 15.889.173.3+15.8
- SciCodeClaude Fable 5.1 by 12.863.150.3+12.8
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Claude Fable 5.1 by 12.791.478.7+12.7
- LiveBench · CodingClaude Fable 5.1 by 11.486.475+11.4
AgentsClaude Fable 5.1
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Claude Fable 5.1 by 39.95212.1+39.9
- AA IT-Bench SREClaude Fable 5.1 by 1849.531.5+18
- GDPValClaude Fable 5.1 by 1662.746.7+16
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingClaude Fable 5.1 by 7.847.239.4+7.8
ReasoningClaude Fable 5.1
- SimpleBenchClaude Fable 5.1 by 40.386.646.3+40.3
- ARC-AGI-2Claude Fable 5.1 by 28.69061.4+28.6
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Fable 5.1 by 20.559.138.6+20.5
- CritPtClaude Fable 5.1 by 13.129.716.6+13.1
- LiveBench · ReasoningClaude Fable 5.1 by 5.191.786.6+5.1
- GPQA DiamondClaude Fable 5.1 by 2.993.790.8+2.9
FactsClaude Fable 5.1
- SimpleQA VerifiedClaude Fable 5.1 by 36.770.834.1+36.7
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Fable 5.1 by 26.867.240.4+26.8
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationClaude Fable 5.1 by 19.127.48.3+19.1
MathClaude Fable 5.1
- FrontierMath Tier 4Claude Fable 5.1 by 63.487.824.4+63.4
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)Claude Fable 5.1 by 32.790.257.5+32.7
- LiveBench · MathematicsClaude Fable 5.1 by 10.29786.8+10.2
Following instructionsClaude Fable 5.1
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingClaude Fable 5.1 by 7.57365.5+7.5
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.
- GDPval-AA v2Claude Fable 5.1 by 664 rating points18531189+664 rating
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Fable 5.1 by 57.843.5-14.3+57.8
- GDPval-AA (Elo)Claude Fable 5.1 by 340 rating points17351395+340 rating
- HLE (with tools)Claude Fable 5.1 by 20.565.645.1+20.5
- AA IntelligenceClaude Fable 5.1 by 19.153.434.3+19.1
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Fable 5.1 by 16.35841.7+16.3
- HiL-Bench (Tools-allowed)Claude Fable 5.1 by 13.761.547.8+13.7
- DeepSWE 1.1Claude Fable 5.1 by 1367.454.4+13
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Fable 5.1 by 12.581.669.1+12.5
- livebench_languageClaude Fable 5.1 by 10.389.579.2+10.3
- ARC-AGI-1Claude Fable 5.1 by 8.597.589+8.5
- Toolathlon VerifiedClaude Fable 5.1 by 7.577.870.3+7.5
- livebench_data_analysisClaude Fable 5.1 by 180.379.3+1
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or DeepSeek-V4-Flash?
Claude Fable 5.1 wins all seven areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, math, long documents and following instructions. DeepSeek-V4-Flash wins none, but costs 99% less.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1. It wins 7 of the 7 coding tests both models report; DeepSeek-V4-Flash wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00 per million input tokens and $50.00 per million output tokens; DeepSeek-V4-Flash costs $0.14 and $0.28. That makes DeepSeek-V4-Flash about 99% 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.