The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 54.8 to 0.7.

Anthropic · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 54.8 to 0.7, ranking #5 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 54.8 and ranks #5 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

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

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
54.8
#5
0.7
#308
Reasoning
52.1
#7
0.4
#301
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 · 11 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instructdon'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
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Tue Sep 01 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Fable 5.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct 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

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct uses Llama 3.1 Community License.

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Llama 3.1 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct was released on 2024-10-01.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 23 months newer than Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

0 days ago

1.9yr newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Oct 1, 2024

1.9 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2023-12-01, while Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct's training data extends to 2023-12-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date.

Claude Fable 5.1

—

Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct

Dec 2023

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 54.8 to 0.7. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is made by NVIDIA. 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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct 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%. Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct scores GSM8k: 91.4%, HellaSwag: 85.6%, Winogrande: 84.5%, GSM8K Chat: 81.9%, MMLU Chat: 80.6%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct 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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (54.8 vs 0.7), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.1 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and Llama 3.1 Nemotron 70B Instruct is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons