Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.8 Max Preview
Wins 6 of 8 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Facts · Math · Long documents
Wins 1 of 8 areas
Following instructions
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger all-rounder.Qwen3.8 Max Preview is cheaper and better at following instructions.
Both rank among the ten best models we track in agents and long documents.
Scores updated · 34 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 software60Claude Fable 5.16 of 6 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own30Claude Fable 5.13 of 4 tests · 1 tie
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking30Claude Fable 5.13 of 4 tests · 1 tie
- 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 asked01Qwen3.8 Max Preview1 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.
Qwen3.8 Max Preview costs 87% 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+41.5points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+35.5points ahead
- Short factual questions, answered correctlySimpleQA Verified+23.5points ahead
Where Qwen3.8 Max Preview pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+43.8points ahead
- Follows detailed instructions exactlyLiveBench · Instruction Following+1.1points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 34 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Fable 5.1
- LiveBench · CodingClaude Fable 5.1 by 13.586.472.9+13.5
- SWE-bench ProClaude Fable 5.1 by 13.581.267.7+13.5
- SciCodeClaude Fable 5.1 by 1163.152.1+11
- LMArena · WebDevClaude Fable 5.1 by 70 rating points17431673+70 rating
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Claude Fable 5.1 by 2.691.488.8+2.6
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingClaude Fable 5.1 by 1.466.164.7+1.4
AgentsClaude Fable 5.1
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Claude Fable 5.1 by 13.15238.9+13.1
- AA IT-Bench SREClaude Fable 5.1 by 9.249.540.3+9.2
- GDPValClaude Fable 5.1 by 4.462.758.3+4.4
- τ-Bench V3 · Bankingtie47.247.8tie
ReasoningClaude Fable 5.1
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Fable 5.1 by 1659.143.1+16
- CritPtClaude Fable 5.1 by 1229.717.7+12
- LiveBench · ReasoningClaude Fable 5.1 by 3.591.788.2+3.5
- GPQA Diamondtie93.792.8tie
FactsClaude Fable 5.1
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationQwen3.8 Max Preview by 43.827.471.2+43.8
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Fable 5.1 by 35.567.231.7+35.5
- SimpleQA VerifiedClaude Fable 5.1 by 23.570.847.3+23.5
MathClaude Fable 5.1
- FrontierMath Tier 4Claude Fable 5.1 by 41.587.846.3+41.5
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)Claude Fable 5.1 by 15.590.274.7+15.5
- LiveBench · MathematicsClaude Fable 5.1 by 5.79791.3+5.7
Following instructionsQwen3.8 Max Preview
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingQwen3.8 Max Preview by 1.17374.1+1.1
Other results11 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 5.1 by 31.543.512+31.5
- GDPval-AA v2Claude Fable 5.1 by 114 rating points18531739+114 rating
- DeepSWE 1.1Claude Fable 5.1 by 10.867.456.6+10.8
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Fable 5.1 by 9.881.671.8+9.8
- livebench_languageClaude Fable 5.1 by 9.889.579.7+9.8
- HLE (with tools)Claude Fable 5.1 by 9.465.656.2+9.4
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Fable 5.1 by 8.45849.6+8.4
- AA IntelligenceClaude Fable 5.1 by 853.445.4+8
- Toolathlon VerifiedClaude Fable 5.1 by 5.377.872.5+5.3
- LVBenchQwen3.8 Max Preview by 2.179.781.8+2.1
- livebench_data_analysisClaude Fable 5.1 by 1.980.378.4+1.9
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Qwen3.8 Max Preview?
Claude Fable 5.1 wins six of the eight areas we test: coding, agents, reasoning, facts, math and long documents. Qwen3.8 Max Preview wins following instructions, and costs 87% less. They are level on images and charts.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1. It wins 6 of the 6 coding tests both models report; Qwen3.8 Max Preview wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00 per million input tokens and $50.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.8 Max Preview costs $2.00 and $6.00. That makes Qwen3.8 Max Preview about 87% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 34 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 23 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 11 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.