Beam 1.0 vs Claude Fable 5.1

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 53.2 to 44.6. Beam 1.0 is 33.3x cheaper per token.

Reflection AI · Anthropic · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 53.2 to 44.6, ranking #9 overall.

The models split the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models evenly.

On price, Beam 1.0 is roughly 33.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Beam 1.0 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Beam 1.0

cost matters — it's about 33.3x cheaper per token
you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Claude Fable 5.1

overall performance matters — it scores 53.2 and ranks #9 on LLM Stats
your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Better token value: Beam 1.0

Core performance indexes

LLM Stats Score

44.6

#46 · 22 evals

53.2

#9 · 6 evals

Best

Reasoning

45.5

#37 · 19 evals

50.8

#12 · 5 evals

Best

Coding

33.7

#39 · 9 evals

34.3

#34 · 2 evals

Best

Agents

28.8

#53 · 9 evals

38.2

#12 · 5 evals

Best

Cost, coverage & limits

Benchmark wins

1 of 2

Input price

$0.40 / M

Best

$10.00 / M

Output price

$1.20 / M

Best

$50.00 / M

Context window

1,048,576

Best

1,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared

Index

Beam 1.0

Claude Fable 5.1

Vision

15.9#105 · 2 evals

41.4#3 · 2 evals

Tool use

26.4#32 · 4 evals

26.9#30 · 3 evals

Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

22 reported for Beam 1.0 · 7 for Claude Fable 5.1

2 shared

Beam 1.0 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (AutomationBench), while Claude Fable 5.1 is better at 1 benchmark (Humanity's Last Exam).

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Beam 1.0 costs less

For input processing, Beam 1.0 ($0.40/1M tokens) is 25.0x cheaper than Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Beam 1.0 ($1.20/1M tokens) is 41.7x cheaper than Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than Beam 1.0.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers

Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Beam 1.0

Input tokens$0.40

Output tokens$1.20

Best providerTogether

Claude Fable 5.1

Input tokens$10.00

Output tokens$50.00

Best providerAnthropic

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Beam 1.0 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude Fable 5.1's 1,000,000 tokens. Beam 1.0 can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Claude Fable 5.1 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Beam 1.0

Input1,048,576 tokens

Output131,072 tokens

Claude Fable 5.1

Input1,000,000 tokens

Output128,000 tokens

Thu Oct 22 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Fable 5.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Beam 1.0 does not.

Claude Fable 5.1 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Beam 1.0

Text

Images

Audio

Video

Claude Fable 5.1

Text

Images

Audio

Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Beam 1.0 is licensed under Apache 2.0, while Claude Fable 5.1 uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Beam 1.0

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Beam 1.0 was released on 2026-10-16, while Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01.

Beam 1.0 is 2 months newer than Claude Fable 5.1.

Beam 1.0

Oct 16, 2026

6 days ago

1mo newer

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Beam 1.0 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-30, while Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Beam 1.0's training data extends to 2026-06-30, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date.

Beam 1.0

Jun 2026

Claude Fable 5.1

—

Provider Availability

Beam 1.0 is available from Together, Reflection AI. Claude Fable 5.1 is available from Anthropic.

Beam 1.0

Together

Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.20/1M

Unknown Organization

Claude Fable 5.1

Anthropic

Input Price:Input: $10.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $50.00/1M

* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Beam 1.0 and Claude Fable 5.1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Beam 1.0

✓ Preferred

Claude Fable 5.1

Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Beam 1.0 vs Claude Fable 5.1.

Which is better, Beam 1.0 or Claude Fable 5.1?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 53.2 to 44.6. Beam 1.0 is made by Reflection AI and Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Beam 1.0 compare to Claude Fable 5.1 in benchmarks?

Beam 1.0 scores AIME 2026: 97.7%, GPQA: 90.6%, LiveCodeBench: 88.3%, SWE-Bench Verified: 81.6%, MCP Atlas: 80.8%. Claude Fable 5.1 scores OSWorld 2.0: 77.9%, CursorBench v3.2: 73.4%, Humanity's Last Exam: 65.0%, GDPval-AA: 61.8%, Terminal-Bench 4.0: 55.8%.

Is Beam 1.0 cheaper than Claude Fable 5.1?

Beam 1.0 is 25.0x cheaper for input tokens. Beam 1.0 costs $0.40/M input and $1.20/M output via together. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic.

What are the context window sizes for Beam 1.0 and Claude Fable 5.1?

Beam 1.0 supports 1.0M tokens and Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Beam 1.0 and Claude Fable 5.1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (44.6 vs 53.2), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.40 vs $10.00/M), multimodal support (no vs yes), licensing (Apache 2.0 vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Beam 1.0 and Claude Fable 5.1?

Beam 1.0 is developed by Reflection AI and Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic.

Beam 1.0 vs Claude Fable 5.1