The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs ERNIE 4.5

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 55.7 to -13.4. ERNIE 4.5 is 15.4x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Baidu · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 55.7 to -13.4, ranking #2 overall.

On price, ERNIE 4.5 is roughly 15.4x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Fable 5.1 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 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 55.7 and ranks #2 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose ERNIE 4.5

  • cost matters — it's about 15.4x cheaper per token

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
ERNIE 4.5
Baidu
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
55.7
#2
-13.4
#369
Reasoning
52.8
#5
-13.4
#363
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$10.00 / M
$0.40 / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
$4.00 / M
Context window
1,000,000
128,000

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 20 for ERNIE 4.5

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.1 and ERNIE 4.5don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

ERNIE 4.5 costs less

For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 25.0x more expensive than ERNIE 4.5 ($0.40/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 12.5x more expensive than ERNIE 4.5 ($4.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than ERNIE 4.5.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input tokens$10.00
Output tokens$50.00
Best providerAnthropic
Baidu
ERNIE 4.5
Input tokens$0.40
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerNovita
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Fable 5.1 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to ERNIE 4.5's 128,000 tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while ERNIE 4.5 is limited to 65,536 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Baidu
ERNIE 4.5
Input128,000 tokens
Output65,536 tokens
Mon Sep 21 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Fable 5.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas ERNIE 4.5 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

ERNIE 4.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

ERNIE 4.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while ERNIE 4.5 was released on 2025-06-25.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 14 months newer than ERNIE 4.5.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

2 weeks ago

1.2yr newer
ERNIE 4.5

Jun 25, 2025

1.2 years 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. ERNIE 4.5 is available from Novita.

Claude Fable 5.1

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

ERNIE 4.5

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
* 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 ERNIE 4.5 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
ERNIE 4.5
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs ERNIE 4.5.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or ERNIE 4.5?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 55.7 to -13.4. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and ERNIE 4.5 is made by Baidu. 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 ERNIE 4.5 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%. ERNIE 4.5 scores GPQA: 74.0%, ARC-E: 60.7%, PIQA: 55.2%, Winogrande: 51.3%, CLUEWSC: 48.6%.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than ERNIE 4.5?

ERNIE 4.5 is 25.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic. ERNIE 4.5 costs $0.40/M input and $4.00/M output via novita.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and ERNIE 4.5?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and ERNIE 4.5 supports 128K 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 ERNIE 4.5?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (55.7 vs -13.4), context window (1.0M vs 128K), input pricing ($10.00 vs $0.40/M), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and ERNIE 4.5?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and ERNIE 4.5 is developed by Baidu.

Related comparisons