Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemma 4 31B
Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.9 to 33.4. Gemma 4 31B is 103.9x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Google · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 56.9 to 33.4, ranking #1 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, Gemma 4 31B is roughly 103.9x 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 56.9 and ranks #1 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 process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026
Choose Gemma 4 31B
- cost matters — it's about 103.9x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 12 for Gemma 4 31B
Claude Fable 5.1 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Humanity's Last Exam), while Gemma 4 31B is better at 0 benchmarks.
Claude Fable 5.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 76.9x more expensive than Gemma 4 31B ($0.13/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 131.6x more expensive than Gemma 4 31B ($0.38/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than Gemma 4 31B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Claude Fable 5.1 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Gemma 4 31B's 262,144 tokens. Gemma 4 31B can generate longer responses up to 131,072 tokens, while Claude Fable 5.1 is limited to 128,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 4 31B support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude Fable 5.1
Gemma 4 31B
License
Usage and distribution terms
Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Gemma 4 31B uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Gemma 4 31B was released on 2026-04-02.
Claude Fable 5.1 is 5 months newer than Gemma 4 31B.
Sep 1, 2026
1 days ago
5mo newerApr 2, 2026
5 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Gemma 4 31B has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-01-01, while Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Gemma 4 31B's training data extends to 2025-01-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date.
—
Jan 2025
Provider Availability
Claude Fable 5.1 is available from Anthropic. Gemma 4 31B is available from DeepInfra, FriendliAI, Novita, Together.
Claude Fable 5.1
Gemma 4 31B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemma 4 31B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemma 4 31B.