← comparisons · head to head
Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Fable 5.1
Claude Fable 5.2 scores higher than Claude Fable 5.1 on both public leaderboards that rate them. On the ArtificialWatch Index, which takes the median of each model's percentile across the boards that score it, Claude Fable 5.2 is at 100 and Claude Fable 5.1 at 91.8 (out of 100). On each maker's API, Claude Fable 5.2 costs $8 / $40 per 1M tokens (input / output) and Claude Fable 5.1 $10 / $50.
Scores as published by each board; table composed November 10, 2026.
Get the next launch alert, free →
Leaderboard by leaderboard
| Board | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Fable 5.1 | Higher |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench global average (0-100) | 84.9 | 84 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Epoch AI Epoch Capabilities Index (ECI) · many benchmarks on one scale | 174.2 | 167 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
Raw scores are each board's own scale, so compare within a row, not across rows. Full table: the bench index.
For coding
On the ArtificialWatch coding index, Claude Fable 5.2 is at 82.7 (#8 of 47) and Claude Fable 5.1 at 88.1 (#5). Claude Fable 5.2 scores higher on 1 of the 2 coding boards that rate both and Claude Fable 5.1 on 1.
| Coding board | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Fable 5.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench · Coding | 79.2 | 89.7 |
| Vals Vibe Code Bench | 93.8 | 90.3 |
Claude Fable 5.2 at a glance
- Developer
- Anthropic
- Status
- Live since November 9, 2026
- API price
- $8 input / $40 output per 1M tokens · Anthropic, claude-fable-5-2
- Context window
- 1M tokens
Live — Nov 9 · Anthropic's upgrade of Fable; Mythos 5.2 is the same underlying model without certain cyber and biology safeguards · claude-fable-5-2 on the Claude API, AWS, Google Cloud and Microsoft Azure · $8 / $40 per 1M (Fable 5.1 was $10 / $50); optional fast mode, up to 2.5x faster, $16 / $80 · 1M ctx, 128K max output, adaptive thinking always on, default effort high on the API and medium in Claude apps, reliable knowledge cutoff Jun 2026 (Anthropic's models overview) · Anthropic's own figures: output up to 30% faster than Fable 5.1; FrontierCode 2.0 45.3% at High (Opus 5.5 best 45.5%) for about half the cost per task, 49.1% at Xhigh; BenchCAD 2.1 83.5 (Opus 5.5 65.3); RoboDojo Sim 64.9% (GPT-6 Astra 29.8%) · Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (read Nov 9 19:55 UTC): Fable 5.2 (Max) 65, ranked first · launch week: eligible paid plans get 1-3 Fable resets, and Pro and standard Team seats can spend up to 50% of weekly usage on Fable · AWS's public price list carried it from 18:09:52 UTC; our sweep first saw claude-fable-5-2 at 18:52:10 UTC and fired at 18:53:06, 4 min 53 s before @claudeai's post · Epoch Capabilities Index (eci_scores.csv, updated Nov 9, read 21:52 UTC): 174.24 (CI 170.12-178.79), ranked first of 255, ahead of GPT-6 Astra 169.16; Fable 5.1 167.04 · SemiAnalysis GDPx (read 01:50 UTC Nov 10): 16.4%, first, ahead of Opus 5.5 12.0% and Fable 5.1 8.5%; $88.15 per task and 1.23M output tokens per task, the most of any model listed · Nov 10: Remote Labor Index (Center for AI Safety and Scale AI, Scale's leaderboard read 14:50 UTC): 41.3%, #1, against Opus 5.5 21.25%, GPT-6 Astra 20.83%, Fable 5.1 17.92% and Gemini 4 Argon 17.08% · SimpleBench (simple-bench.com leaderboard data, read 18:50 UTC Nov 10): 94.9% AVG@5, #1, half a point below the highest human score of 95.4%, ahead of Gemini 4 Carbon 92.6% and Argon 91.7%.
Claude Fable 5.2 tops SimpleBench at 94.9%, half a point below the best human score, with Gemini 4 Carbon second at 92.6%
2026-11-10 · Claude Fable 5.2 is #1 on SimpleBench at 94.9%, half a point below the highest human score the benchmark records, 95.4%. SimpleBench's leaderboard data, read by ArtificialWatch at 18:50 UTC on November 10, added Fable 5.2 and both Gemini 4 models that day. @Mr_Salio flagged the update at 18:03 UTC.
Claude Fable 5.2 tops the Remote Labor Index at 41.3%, nearly double the next model
2026-11-10 · Claude Fable 5.2 is #1 on the Remote Labor Index, fully automating 41.3% of its projects. That is nearly double the next model, Claude Opus 5.5, at 21.25%. ArtificialWatch read the scores on Scale AI's public leaderboard at 14:50 UTC on November 10.
Claude Fable 5.1 at a glance
- Developer
- Anthropic
- Status
- Live since September 1, 2026
- API price
- $10 input / $50 output per 1M tokens · Anthropic, claude-fable-5-1
- Context window
- 1M tokens
Live - sticker price held at $10/$50, but cache reads cut 75% to $0.25 = ~25% cheaper typical, up to ~45% agentic · 1M ctx · effort low-max.
Claude Fable 5.1 is live — the sticker price never moved, and the cache read fell 75%
2026-09-01 · Claude Fable 5.1 shipped today, alongside Claude Mythos 5.1. Our radar detected it at 17:52:22 UTC and confirmed it on the next sweep 60 seconds later.
Fable 5.1's August window has closed — the market now prices September at 78%, and one claim in the leak can't be checked at all
2026-08-20 · A claim going round today says Fable 5.1 is in pre-release testing, targeted at September, and running inside Anthropic's own products under the Fable 5 name. One part of that is checkable, one part is checkable and slipping, and one part is — by construction — invisible to anything we can measure.
Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Fable 5.1: quick answers
Which is better, Claude Fable 5.2 or Claude Fable 5.1?
It depends on what you measure. Claude Fable 5.2 scores higher than Claude Fable 5.1 on both public leaderboards that rate them. Claude Fable 5.2's widest lead is on Epoch AI. On the ArtificialWatch Index, which takes the median of each model's percentile across the boards that score it, Claude Fable 5.2 is at 100 and Claude Fable 5.1 at 91.8 (out of 100).
Which is newer, Claude Fable 5.2 or Claude Fable 5.1?
Claude Fable 5.2. It went live on November 9, 2026, 69 days after Claude Fable 5.1 (September 1, 2026).
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.2 or Claude Fable 5.1?
Claude Fable 5.2 is cheaper on both input and output. On each vendor's own API, Claude Fable 5.2 is $8 input / $40 output per million tokens and Claude Fable 5.1 is $10 input / $50 output per million tokens. Prices as published in the models.dev catalog, as of 2026-11-10.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Fable 5.2 or Claude Fable 5.1?
Neither. Both take 1M tokens.
How do Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Fable 5.1 compare for coding?
On the ArtificialWatch coding index, Claude Fable 5.2 is at 82.7 (#8 of 47) and Claude Fable 5.1 at 88.1 (#5). Claude Fable 5.2 scores higher on 1 of the 2 coding boards that rate both and Claude Fable 5.1 on 1.
Who makes Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Fable 5.1?
Both are from Anthropic.
Where do these numbers come from?
Each score is the leaderboard's own published figure, read by ArtificialWatch (table composed November 10, 2026). Boards measure different things, so raw scores are only comparable within a row.
More comparisons
Hear when the next one drops. Free.
Free: a Chrome push and an email about 15 minutes after a new model answers on a public API. Members get a text or a phone call the moment a launch is confirmed.
- Free forever
- No card
- Unsubscribe in one click
Also: the bench index · API pricing · what a workload costs on each · the wire