The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 55.7 to -5.2.

Anthropic · Google · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 55.7 to -5.2, ranking #2 overall.

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 and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
Google
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
55.7
#2
-5.2
#356
Reasoning
52.8
#5
-5.9
#351
Coding
35.5
#26
-0.1
#241
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$10.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 28 for Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Previewdon'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

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Fable 5.1 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Fable 5.1 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Google
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Sun Sep 20 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Fable 5.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview uses Gemma.

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Gemma

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview was released on 2025-05-20.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 16 months newer than Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

2 weeks ago

1.3yr newer
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

May 20, 2025

1.3 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date.

Claude Fable 5.1

—

Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview

Jun 2024

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 55.7 to -5.2. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is made by Google. 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 Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview 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%. Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview scores ARC-E: 81.6%, BoolQ: 81.6%, PIQA: 81.0%, HellaSwag: 78.6%, HumanEval: 75.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview supports an unknown number of 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 Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (55.7 vs -5.2), licensing (Proprietary vs Gemma). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and Gemma 3n E4B Instructed LiteRT Preview is developed by Google.

Related comparisons