The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Llama 4 Scout

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.9 to 8.1. Llama 4 Scout is 148.1x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 56.9 to 8.1, ranking #1 overall.

On price, Llama 4 Scout is roughly 148.1x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Llama 4 Scout also accepts a larger context window (10,000,000 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 coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Llama 4 Scout

  • cost matters — it's about 148.1x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 10,000,000 token context window
  • 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 4 Scout
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
56.9
#1
8.1
#269
Reasoning
54.6
#4
6.8
#271
Coding
37.8
#15
0.5
#229
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$10.00 / M
$0.08 / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
$0.30 / M
Context window
1,000,000
10,000,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.1
Llama 4 Scout
Vision
40.8#1
10.4#118
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 12 for Llama 4 Scout

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 4 Scoutdon'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

Llama 4 Scout costs less

For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 125.0x more expensive than Llama 4 Scout ($0.08/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 166.7x more expensive than Llama 4 Scout ($0.30/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than Llama 4 Scout.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input tokens$10.00
Output tokens$50.00
Best providerAnthropic
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
Input tokens$0.08
Output tokens$0.30
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Llama 4 Scout accepts 10,000,000 input tokens compared to Claude Fable 5.1's 1,000,000 tokens. Llama 4 Scout can generate longer responses up to 10,000,000 tokens, while Claude Fable 5.1 is limited to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Meta
Llama 4 Scout
Input10,000,000 tokens
Output10,000,000 tokens
Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout 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

Llama 4 Scout

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 4 Scout uses Llama 4 Community License Agreement.

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 4 Scout

Llama 4 Community License Agreement

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Llama 4 Scout was released on 2025-04-05.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 17 months newer than Llama 4 Scout.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

1 days ago

1.4yr newer
Llama 4 Scout

Apr 5, 2025

1.4 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. Llama 4 Scout is available from DeepInfra, Lambda, Novita, Groq, Fireworks, Together.

Claude Fable 5.1

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

Llama 4 Scout

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.08/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M
lambda logo
Lambda
Input Price:Input: $0.08/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.30/1M
novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M
groq logo
Groq
Input Price:Input: $0.11/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.34/1M
fireworks logo
Fireworks
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.60/1M
together logo
Together
Input Price:Input: $0.18/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.59/1M
* 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 Llama 4 Scout side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
Llama 4 Scout
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Llama 4 Scout.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Scout?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.9 to 8.1. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and Llama 4 Scout is made by Meta. 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 4 Scout 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 4 Scout scores DocVQA: 94.4%, MGSM: 90.6%, ChartQA: 88.8%, MMLU: 79.6%, MMLU-Pro: 74.3%.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than Llama 4 Scout?

Llama 4 Scout is 125.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic. Llama 4 Scout costs $0.08/M input and $0.30/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Llama 4 Scout supports 10.0M 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 4 Scout?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (56.9 vs 8.1), context window (1.0M vs 10.0M), input pricing ($10.00 vs $0.08/M), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 4 Community License Agreement). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 4 Scout?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and Llama 4 Scout is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons