The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Mistral NeMo Instruct

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.8 to -4.9. Mistral NeMo Instruct is 133.3x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Mistral AI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 56.8 to -4.9, ranking #1 overall.

On price, Mistral NeMo Instruct is roughly 133.3x 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 56.8 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • 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 Mistral NeMo Instruct

  • cost matters — it's about 133.3x 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
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Mistral AI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
56.8
#1
-4.9
#339
Reasoning
54.6
#4
-5.1
#331
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$10.00 / M
$0.15 / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
$0.15 / M
Context window
1,000,000
128,000

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 8 for Mistral NeMo Instruct

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.1 and Mistral NeMo 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

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Mistral NeMo Instruct costs less

For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 66.7x more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct ($0.15/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 333.3x more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct ($0.15/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than Mistral NeMo Instruct.*

* 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
Mistral AI
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input tokens$0.15
Output tokens$0.15
Best providerGoogle
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 Mistral NeMo Instruct's 128,000 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 128,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.1
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Mistral AI
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Fable 5.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Mistral NeMo 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

Mistral NeMo Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Mistral NeMo Instruct 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

Mistral NeMo Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Mistral NeMo Instruct was released on 2024-07-18.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 26 months newer than Mistral NeMo Instruct.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

1 days ago

2.1yr newer
Mistral NeMo Instruct

Jul 18, 2024

2.1 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. Mistral NeMo Instruct is available from Google, Mistral AI.

Claude Fable 5.1

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

Mistral NeMo Instruct

google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.15/1M
mistral logo
Mistral
Input Price:Input: $0.15/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.15/1M
* 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 Mistral NeMo Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
Mistral NeMo Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Mistral NeMo Instruct.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Mistral NeMo Instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 56.8 to -4.9. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and Mistral NeMo Instruct is made by Mistral AI. 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 Mistral NeMo 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%. Mistral NeMo Instruct scores HellaSwag: 83.5%, Winogrande: 76.8%, TriviaQA: 73.8%, CommonSenseQA: 70.4%, MMLU: 68.0%.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than Mistral NeMo Instruct?

Mistral NeMo Instruct is 66.7x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic. Mistral NeMo Instruct costs $0.15/M input and $0.15/M output via google.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and Mistral NeMo Instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Mistral NeMo Instruct supports 128K 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 Mistral NeMo Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (56.8 vs -4.9), context window (1.0M vs 128K), input pricing ($10.00 vs $0.15/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and Mistral NeMo Instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and Mistral NeMo Instruct is developed by Mistral AI.

Related comparisons