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 Sonnet 5
Winner: Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic model comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Sonnet 5

Claude Fable 5.1 wins on coding (100 vs 98). Claude Sonnet 5 wins on price ($3 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 Sonnet 5

View
Why this recommendation

Claude Sonnet 5 is the better pick when response speed matters more than maximum reasoning depth.

AnthropicPremium
Best for
High-volume agentic workloads and production apps at mid-tier pricing
Price
$3.00/1M
Context
1M tokens

Why this page recommends it

Claude Fable 5.1 leads on coding with a score of 100 vs 98 for Claude Sonnet 5.

Claude Sonnet 5 is cheaper at $3/1M 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.

Claude Sonnet 5 earns its place when your work is mostly high-volume agentic workloads and production apps at mid-tier pricing, even though it loses the overall count here.

Claude Sonnet 5 is the more cost-efficient option at $3/1M input — Claude Fable 5.1 costs 3x 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 Sonnet 591 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 Sonnet 5

Best value Claude — agentic Sonnet speed with near-Opus capability.

Best use case
High-volume agentic workloads and production apps at mid-tier pricing
Input
$3.00/1M
Pricing
Premium
Speed
Fast
Context
1M tokens
AgenticCodingWriting

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 Sonnet 5Anthropic$3.00/1M$15.00/1M$601M tokensFast989895

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 Sonnet 5

Anthropic

Anthropic's most agentic Sonnet yet — a fast 1M-context workhorse that narrows the gap to Opus-class quality at $3/$15, and the new default model on claude.ai.

Input
$3.00/1M
Output
$15.00/1M
Context
1M tokens
Speed
Fast

What people actually use it for

  • Production agent loops that plan, call tools, verify output, and finish multi-step tasks
  • High-volume coding assistance at one-fifth of Opus 5's price
  • Computer-use automation — 78.5% on OSWorld-Verified

Where it wins

  • 72.7% on SWE-bench Verified (vs Sonnet 4.6's 62.3% on the same eval) with launch promo pricing of $2/$10 through August 31, 2026
  • 78.5% OSWorld-Verified computer use and 46.8% on Humanity's Last Exam with tools
  • 1M-token context in the fast Sonnet latency class — Opus-adjacent quality without Opus latency

Where it falls down

  • Clearly behind Opus 5 and Fable 5 on the hardest reasoning and long-horizon agent tasks
  • Updated tokenizer produces ~1.0–1.35x more tokens for the same text, so effective cost runs above sticker price

Skip it if

You need the absolute top coding ceiling — Opus 5 leads SWE-bench Verified by over 20 points.

Our verdict

The best price-to-capability pick in the Claude lineup. Sonnet 5 replaces Sonnet 4.6 as the production default: markedly better agentic coding and computer use at the same standard price, with a $2/$10 promo through August 2026.

Released June 30, 2026. Default model for Free and Pro claude.ai plans. Promo pricing $2/$10 per 1M through Aug 31, 2026, then $3/$15. 128K max output, Jan 2026 knowledge cutoff.

Explore related decisions

Comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5 — see exactly which wins on SWE-bench coding, price per 1M tokens, context window, and speed, with a clear verdict for every…Read guide
Comparison
Claude Sonnet 5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6Claude Sonnet 5 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 Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5.6 TerraClaude Sonnet 5 vs GPT-5.6 Terra — 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 Sonnet 5Best value Claude — agentic Sonnet speed with near-Opus capability.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 Sonnet 5 AlternativesLooking for a Claude Sonnet 5 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 Sonnet 5

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 sonnet 5 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 Sonnet 5?

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 Sonnet 5 is the better pick when your work is mostly high-volume agentic workloads and production apps at mid-tier pricing. Neither is universally "better": Claude Fable 5.1 is aimed at frontier agentic coding and long-horizon autonomous work, Claude Sonnet 5 at high-volume agentic workloads and production apps at mid-tier pricing.

Which is cheaper — Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Sonnet 5?

Claude Sonnet 5 is cheaper at $3/1M input and $15/1M 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 Sonnet 5?

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Sonnet 5 have the same 1M context window.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Sonnet 5 better for coding?

Claude Fable 5.1 is better for coding with a score of 100 vs Claude Sonnet 5's 98 (out of 100). Claude Fable 5.1 is the overall coding leader in this directory at 100/100.

Which is faster — Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Sonnet 5?

Claude Sonnet 5 is faster with a fast speed rating (score: 4) vs Claude Fable 5.1's deliberate rating (score: 2). Speed matters most for interactive and high-throughput work; for batch jobs the Claude Fable 5.1 latency penalty is usually invisible.

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 Sonnet 5 instead.

What are the downsides of Claude Sonnet 5?

Clearly behind Opus 5 and Fable 5 on the hardest reasoning and long-horizon agent tasks. Updated tokenizer produces ~1.0–1.35x more tokens for the same text, so effective cost runs above sticker price. Avoid it if you need the absolute top coding ceiling — Opus 5 leads SWE-bench Verified by over 20 points. Against Claude Fable 5.1 specifically, the gap shows up most on coding (100 vs 98).

What does a month of real work cost on Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Sonnet 5?

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 Sonnet 5 runs $60.00 (at $3/1M in and $15/1M out). That is a $140.00/month difference — Claude Sonnet 5 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 Sonnet 5 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 Sonnet 5 handling high-volume agentic workloads and production apps at mid-tier pricing. Routing high-volume, low-stakes calls to Claude Sonnet 5 at $3/1M and reserving Claude Fable 5.1 for the hard cases is usually the cheapest arrangement that does not cost you quality.