The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Inkling

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.3 to 37.5. Inkling is 11.6x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Thinking Machines Lab · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 56.3 to 37.5, 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, Inkling is roughly 11.6x 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 56.3 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 process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Inkling

  • cost matters — it's about 11.6x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
Inkling
Thinking Machines Lab
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
56.3
#2
37.5
#66
Reasoning
53.3
#5
37.3
#66
Coding
35.0
#29
27.5
#58
Agents
41.9
#2
20.7
#58
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
1 of 1
0 of 1
Input price
$10.00 / M
$0.95 / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
$4.05 / M
Context window
1,000,000
524,288

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

2 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.1
Inkling
Vision
41.7#2
15.8#88
Tool use
30.5#15
19.1#60
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 16 for Inkling

1 shared

Claude Fable 5.1 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (GDPval-AA), while Inkling is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Inkling costs less

For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 10.5x more expensive than Inkling ($0.95/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 12.3x more expensive than Inkling ($4.05/1M tokens).

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

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input tokens$10.00
Output tokens$50.00
Best providerAnthropic
Thinking Machines Lab
Inkling
Input tokens$0.95
Output tokens$4.05
Best providerDeepinfra
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 Inkling's 524,288 tokens. Inkling can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while Claude Fable 5.1 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Thinking Machines Lab
Inkling
Input524,288 tokens
Output524,288 tokens
Wed Sep 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Inkling 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

Inkling

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

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

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Inkling

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Inkling was released on 2026-07-21.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 1 month newer than Inkling.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

1 weeks ago

1mo newer
Inkling

Jul 21, 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. Inkling is available from DeepInfra.

Claude Fable 5.1

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

Inkling

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.95/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.05/1M
* 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 Inkling side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
Inkling
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Inkling.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Inkling?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.3 to 37.5. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and Inkling is made by Thinking Machines Lab. 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 Inkling 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%. Inkling scores AIME 2026: 97.1%, VoiceBench Avg: 91.4%, Global-MMLU-Lite: 88.7%, IFBench: 79.8%, CharXiv-R: 78.1%.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than Inkling?

Inkling is 10.5x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic. Inkling costs $0.95/M input and $4.05/M output via deepinfra.

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

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Inkling supports 524K 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 Inkling?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (56.3 vs 37.5), context window (1.0M vs 524K), input pricing ($10.00 vs $0.95/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and Inkling?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and Inkling is developed by Thinking Machines Lab.

Related comparisons