UseRightAI
HomeModelsAsk AIComparePricingWhat's New
UseRightAICut through AI hype. Pick what works.

Independent AI model tracker. Live pricing, real benchmarks, zero vendor bias.

X (Twitter)LinkedInUpdatesContact

Compare

Opus 4.8 vs Opus 4.7Fable 5 vs Opus 4.8New AI Models 2026ChatGPT vs ClaudeGPT-4o vs Claude SonnetClaude vs GeminiDeepSeek vs ChatGPTMistral vs ClaudeGemini Flash vs GPT-4o MiniLlama vs ChatGPTAll comparisons →Build your own →

Best For

CodingWritingDevelopersProduct ManagersDesignersSalesBest Cheap AIBest Free AI

Pricing & Data

API Token PricingCost per TaskPrice HistoryBenchmark ScoresPrivacy & SafetySubscription PlansCost CalculatorWhich AI is Cheapest?Cheapest AI APIs

Company

About UseRightAIContactWhat ChangedAll ModelsEditorial PolicyDisclosuresPrivacy PolicyTerms of Service

© 2026 UseRightAI. Independent · Free forever · Not affiliated with any AI provider.

Affiliate links are clearly labeled. See disclosures.

Home/Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 4.8
Winner: Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 4.8

Claude Opus 4.8 wins on price ($5 vs $10/1M input). For most workflows, Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger default — new frontier leader — better than fable 5 on every published benchmark, and cheaper to run.

Last verified Sep 1, 2026/Model data modified Sep 1, 2026
Rankings refresh dailyScored on 6 criteriaNo paid rankings
AnthropicPremium
Input cost
$10.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate

Clear recommendation block

The shortest way to see the safest default, the lower-cost option, and the specialist pick before you read deeper.

Best overall model

Claude Fable 5.1

View
Why this recommendation

Claude Fable 5.1 is the safest overall answer here when you want the strongest default instead of the lowest list price.

AnthropicPremium
Best for
Frontier agentic coding, long-horizon autonomous work, and agentic scientific research
Price
$10.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Best budget model

Grok 4.5

View
Why this recommendation

Grok 4.5 is the lower-cost option to start with when you still need useful output at scale.

xAIBalanced
Best for
Fast, token-efficient coding agents
Price
$2.00/1M
Context
500k tokens
Best for speed

Claude Opus 4.8

View
Why this recommendation

Claude Opus 4.8 is the better pick when response speed matters more than maximum reasoning depth.

AnthropicPremium
Best for
Hardest coding tasks, parallel agentic workflows, and high-fidelity vision
Price
$5.00/1M
Context
1M tokens

Why this page recommends it

Claude Fable 5.1 leads on coding with a score of 100 vs 100 for Claude Opus 4.8.

Claude Opus 4.8 is cheaper at $5/1M input tokens vs $10/1M for Claude Fable 5.1.

Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger default for coding tasks.

Decision notes

Claude Fable 5.1 is the safer default: it is built for frontier agentic coding, long-horizon autonomous work, and agentic scientific research, which covers most of what people bring to this comparison.

Switch to Claude Opus 4.8 when your work is mostly hardest coding tasks and parallel agentic workflows; on that narrower brief it is the better tool.

Claude Opus 4.8 is the more cost-efficient option at $5/1M input — Claude Fable 5.1 costs 2x more per input token, so the gap is worth taking seriously wherever token volume rather than peak quality drives the bill.

Interactive decision lab

Test the recommendation against your priority

Switch the scoring lens to see whether the top answer changes when you care more about cost, speed, or long-document work.

#1Claude Fable 5.191 pts
#2Claude Opus 4.890 pts
Quality first

Claude Fable 5.1

Anthropic / Premium / Sep 1, 2026

91

New frontier leader — better than Fable 5 on every published benchmark, and cheaper to run.

Ranks models by the broadest mix of coding, writing, research, and long-context usefulness.

Cost
$10.00/1M
$50.00/1M out
Speed
Deliberate
2/5 score
Context
1M tokens
input window
View model
Data-backed recommendation
Avoid this pick if

You need low latency, or your workload is uncached and cost-sensitive — Claude Opus 5 is half the base price and within a few points on agentic coding.

Recommended comparisons

The fastest way to see where the recommendation shifts when your priority changes.

AnthropicPremiumWinner: Claude Fable 5.1

Claude Fable 5.1

New frontier leader — better than Fable 5 on every published benchmark, and cheaper to run.

Best use case
Frontier agentic coding, long-horizon autonomous work, and agentic scientific research
Input
$10.00/1M
Pricing
Premium
Speed
Deliberate
Context
1M tokens
Coding leaderFrontierAgentic
AnthropicPremiumOption 2

Claude Opus 4.8

Best value premium coder — frontier-grade at half of Fable 5's price.

Best use case
Hardest coding tasks, parallel agentic workflows, and high-fidelity vision
Input
$5.00/1M
Pricing
Premium
Speed
Deliberate
Context
1M tokens
CodingParallel subagentsAgentic

Side-by-side specs

Every figure below is the provider's list price or a published capability score — the same numbers the recommendation on this page is built from.

ModelInputOutputEst. monthContextSpeedCodingWritingResearch
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic$10.00/1M$50.00/1M$2001M tokensDeliberate10098100
Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic$5.00/1M$25.00/1M$1001M tokensDeliberate1009698

Capability scores are out of 100 and reflect our own weighting of published benchmarks and production signals — see how we evaluate models. “Est. month” assumes 10M input and 2M output tokens at list price, with no batch or caching discounts applied, so treat it as a ceiling.

The case for each model

What each one is genuinely good at, where it falls down, and the situations we would steer you away from it — not just the headline score.

Claude Fable 5.1

Winner: Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic

Anthropic's September 1, 2026 frontier release and the new capability ceiling for coding, agents, and scientific work. Base pricing is unchanged at $10/$50, but cache reads dropped 75% to $0.25/1M — roughly 25% cheaper on typical workloads and up to 45% cheaper on agentic ones. 1M context, 128K output, adaptive thinking always on.

Input
$10.00/1M
Output
$50.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate

What people actually use it for

  • Agentic scientific research — 52.6% on Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1, more than double Fable 5's 24.7%
  • Long-running autonomous coding agents that plan, run, and debug across a whole repository
  • Cache-heavy agent loops where the 75% cache-read cut ($1.00 → $0.25 per 1M) is the real saving

Where it wins

  • 52.6% Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 — 2.1x Fable 5 (24.7%), well clear of Opus 5 (29.0%) and GPT-5.6 Sol (22.4%)
  • 55.8% Terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding, ahead of Opus 5 (52.3%) and Fable 5 (42.0%)
  • Cache reads cut 75% to $0.25/1M — ~25% cheaper for typical use, ~45% for heavily agentic work
  • Independent Vals AI evaluation ranks it #1 of 51 on the Vals Index, #1 on LiveCodeBench (90.5%) and MMLU Pro (92.4%)
  • 1M-token context and 128K max output at standard rates, with adaptive thinking always enabled

Where it falls down

  • Base rates are still $10/$50 per 1M — double Claude Opus 5 for anything that is not cache-heavy
  • Anthropic published no SWE-bench Verified or SWE-bench Pro figure for 5.1 at launch
  • On Claude Pro it only runs on pay-as-you-go credits; Max includes it up to 50% of weekly limits
  • Deliberate, high-latency profile — the wrong choice for interactive, latency-bound apps

Skip it if

You need low latency, or your workload is uncached and cost-sensitive — Claude Opus 5 is half the base price and within a few points on agentic coding.

Our verdict

The new frontier leader, and the rare upgrade that costs less than the model it replaces. Base $10/$50 pricing did not move, but a 75% cut to cache reads makes typical workloads ~25% cheaper than Fable 5 and heavily agentic ones ~45% cheaper — while more than doubling Fable 5 on agentic science and beating Opus 5 on agentic coding. If you were already on Fable 5, switching is a straight win. If you were on Opus 5 for the price, it still costs 2x on uncached tokens.

Released September 1, 2026 alongside Claude Mythos 5.1, the first update to the Mythos-class line since Fable 5 on June 9. API ID claude-fable-5-1; generally available on the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, Google Cloud, and Microsoft Foundry. Published launch numbers (Fable 5.1 / Fable 5 / Opus 5 / GPT-5.6 Sol): Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 52.6 / 24.7 / 29.0 / 22.4; Terminal-Bench 4.0 55.8 / 42.0 / 52.3 / 37.3; CursorBench 3.2.0 73.4 / 70.5 / 70.0 / 67.2; AutomationBench 31.4 / 17.1 / 26.9 / 19.6; OSWorld 2.0 strict 41.7 / 36.1 / 39.6; Humanity's Last Exam (no tools) 60.9 / 57.8 / 56.6; GDPval-AA v2 1853 / 1723 / 1824 / 1711. GDPval-AA v2 is rescaled from the v1 numbers quoted on the Fable 5 page and is not directly comparable to them.

Claude Opus 4.8

Anthropic

Anthropic's newest Opus flagship — 69.2% SWE-Bench Pro, 88.6% SWE-Bench Verified, 1890 Arena Elo (121 pts ahead of GPT-5.5), and native parallel subagents. Same $5/$25 price as Opus 4.7.

Input
$5.00/1M
Output
$25.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Speed
Deliberate

What people actually use it for

  • Running parallel subagent workflows that split, solve, and merge complex engineering tasks
  • Autonomous PR review and multi-file refactors where accuracy matters more than speed
  • Deep research synthesis across 1M-token corpora — patents, codebases, legal documents

Where it wins

  • 69.2% SWE-Bench Pro — new #1, up from Opus 4.7's 64.3%
  • 88.6% SWE-Bench Verified and 83.4% OSWorld computer use
  • Native parallel subagents: orchestrated multi-agent execution in a single call
  • 1890 Arena Elo, 121 points ahead of GPT-5.5

Where it falls down

  • Deliberate pace — not the right pick for latency-sensitive applications
  • Same price tier as Opus 4.7; not a budget option

Skip it if

You need the highest possible coding ceiling (Fable 5 / Mythos 5), low-latency responses, or a workflow locked to OpenAI tooling.

Our verdict

The best value at the premium tier now that Claude Fable 5 leads on raw capability. 69.2% SWE-Bench Pro, 1890 Elo, and built-in parallel subagents at $5/$25 — half the price of Fable 5. The smart default for serious coding when you don't need the absolute frontier.

Launched May 27, 2026. Available on Claude API, AWS Bedrock, Google Vertex AI, Microsoft Foundry, and GitHub Copilot. Fast mode available at $10/$50 per 1M tokens.

Explore related decisions

Comparison
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6 — see exactly which wins on SWE-bench coding, price per 1M tokens, context window, and speed, with a clear verdict for…Read guide
Comparison
Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.4Claude Opus 4.8 vs GPT-5.4 — see exactly which wins on SWE-bench coding, price per 1M tokens, context window, and speed, with a clear verdict for every use…Read guide
Comparison
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Gemini 3.1 ProClaude Opus 4.8 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro — see exactly which wins on SWE-bench coding, price per 1M tokens, context window, and speed, with a clear verdict for every…Read guide
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1New frontier leader — better than Fable 5 on every published benchmark, and cheaper to run.Read guide
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.8Best value premium coder — frontier-grade at half of Fable 5's price.Read guide
Alternatives
Best Claude Fable 5.1 AlternativesLooking for a Claude Fable 5.1 alternative? Compare 4 rivals on real capability scores, price per 1M tokens, and context size — including cheaper and…Read guide
Alternatives
Best Claude Opus 4.8 AlternativesLooking for a Claude Opus 4.8 alternative? Compare 4 rivals on real capability scores, price per 1M tokens, and context size — including cheaper and…Read guide
Guide
Best AI for CodingClaude Opus 4.7 leads coding AI in 2026 with 64.3% on SWE-Bench Pro. Compare it to GPT-5.5, Claude Sonnet 4.6, and budget picks like DeepSeek V3 for your stack.Read guide

Quick links

Browse all modelsCompare pricingView Claude Fable 5.1View Claude Opus 4.8

How we evaluate AI models

UseRightAI recommendations are based on practical decision factors people actually feel in day-to-day use.

Newsletter

Get updates when claude fable 5.1 vs claude opus 4.8 changes

Useful if you care about ranking shifts, pricing changes, or a better recommendation appearing in this decision path.

No spam. Useful updates only. Affiliate disclosures always clearly labeled.

FAQ

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Claude Opus 4.8?

Claude Fable 5.1 wins on more of the categories we score — coding, research, long context — so it is the better default of the two. Claude Opus 4.8 is the better pick when your work is mostly hardest coding tasks and parallel agentic workflows. Neither is universally "better": Claude Fable 5.1 is aimed at frontier agentic coding and long-horizon autonomous work, Claude Opus 4.8 at hardest coding tasks and parallel agentic workflows.

Which is cheaper — Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Opus 4.8?

Claude Opus 4.8 is cheaper at $5/1M input and $25/1M output. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10/1M input and $50/1M output.

Which has a larger context window — Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Opus 4.8?

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Opus 4.8 have the same 1M context window.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Opus 4.8 better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Opus 4.8 are similarly matched on coding. Claude Fable 5.1 is the overall coding leader in this directory at 100/100.

Which is faster — Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Opus 4.8?

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Opus 4.8 have similar speed profiles — rated deliberate. Neither will be the bottleneck if latency is your deciding factor.

What are the downsides of Claude Fable 5.1?

Base rates are still $10/$50 per 1M — double Claude Opus 5 for anything that is not cache-heavy. Anthropic published no SWE-bench Verified or SWE-bench Pro figure for 5.1 at launch. On Claude Pro it only runs on pay-as-you-go credits; Max includes it up to 50% of weekly limits. Avoid it if you need low latency, or your workload is uncached and cost-sensitive — Claude Opus 5 is half the base price and within a few points on agentic coding. That is the main case for looking at Claude Opus 4.8 instead.

What are the downsides of Claude Opus 4.8?

Deliberate pace — not the right pick for latency-sensitive applications. Same price tier as Opus 4.7; not a budget option. Avoid it if you need the highest possible coding ceiling (Fable 5 / Mythos 5), low-latency responses, or a workflow locked to OpenAI tooling. Against Claude Fable 5.1 specifically, the two are close enough on capability that price and speed decide it.

What does a month of real work cost on Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 4.8?

Take a moderate workload of 10M input and 2M output tokens a month. Claude Fable 5.1 runs $200.00 (at $10/1M in and $50/1M out); Claude Opus 4.8 runs $100.00 (at $5/1M in and $25/1M out). That is a $100.00/month difference — Claude Opus 4.8 is the cheaper of the two at this volume, and the gap scales linearly as you send more. Output tokens dominate the bill on both, so prompt length matters far less than response length.

Can I use Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Opus 4.8 together?

Yes, and for most teams that beats picking one. A common split is Claude Fable 5.1 for frontier agentic coding and long-horizon autonomous work, with Claude Opus 4.8 handling hardest coding tasks and parallel agentic workflows. Routing high-volume, low-stakes calls to Claude Opus 4.8 at $5/1M and reserving Claude Fable 5.1 for the hard cases is usually the cheapest arrangement that does not cost you quality.