The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.3 to 45.0. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is 222.2x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · DeepSeek · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 56.3 to 45.0, ranking #2 overall.

In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Fable 5.1 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

On price, DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is roughly 222.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 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 Claude Fable 5.1

  • overall performance matters — it scores 56.3 and ranks #2 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

  • cost matters — it's about 222.2x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
DeepSeek
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
56.3
#2
45.0
#33
Reasoning
53.3
#5
42.5
#43
Coding
35.0
#29
33.4
#35
Agents
41.9
#2
31.3
#30
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$10.00 / M
$0.06 / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
$0.18 / M
Context window
1,000,000
1,048,576

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.1
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Tool use
30.5#15
26.1#29
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 9 for DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

1 shared

Claude Fable 5.1 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (AutomationBench), while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Thu Sep 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 costs less

For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 166.7x more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 ($0.06/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 277.8x more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 ($0.18/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Sep 10 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input tokens$10.00
Output tokens$50.00
Best providerAnthropic
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Input tokens$0.06
Output tokens$0.18
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude Fable 5.1's 1,000,000 tokens. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 can generate longer responses up to 1,048,576 tokens, while Claude Fable 5.1 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
DeepSeek
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output1,048,576 tokens
Thu Sep 10 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Fable 5.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 does not.

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 uses MIT.

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 was released on 2026-07-31.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 1 month newer than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

1 weeks ago

1mo newer
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

Jul 31, 2026

1 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude Fable 5.1 is available from Anthropic. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is available from DeepInfra, Novita, Fireworks.

Claude Fable 5.1

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $10.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $50.00/1M

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.06/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.18/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.14/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.28/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.44/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.32/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.3 to 45.0. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is made by DeepSeek. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Fable 5.1 compare to DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 in benchmarks?

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%. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 scores Terminal-Bench 2.1: 82.7%, CyberGym: 76.7%, Toolathlon: 70.3%, DSBench-FullStack: 68.7%, DSBench-Hard: 59.6%.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731?

DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is 166.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic. DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 costs $0.06/M input and $0.18/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 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 Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (56.3 vs 45.0), context window (1.0M vs 1.0M), input pricing ($10.00 vs $0.06/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and DeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731 is developed by DeepSeek.

Related comparisons