The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 53.2 to 22.1.

Anthropic · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 53.2 to 22.1, ranking #8 overall.

In the 2 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Fable 5.1 wins 2; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Claude Fable 5.1

  • overall performance matters — it scores 53.2 and ranks #8 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 2 of 2 exact shared results

Choose Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
53.2
#8
22.1
#202
Reasoning
50.7
#12
19.8
#213
Coding
34.2
#34
2.9
#241
Agents
38.2
#11
-0.7
#198
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
2 of 2
0 of 2
Input price
$10.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.1
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Tool use
26.8#29
-2.1#205
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 10 for Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

2 shared

Claude Fable 5.1 outperforms in 2 benchmarks (GDPval-AA, Humanity's Last Exam), while Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is better at 0 benchmarks.

Claude Fable 5.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

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
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Mon Oct 19 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Fable 5.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) 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

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) uses OpenMDW License v1.1.

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

OpenMDW License v1.1

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) was released on 2026-10-16.

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is 2 months newer than Claude Fable 5.1.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

1 months ago

Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)

Oct 16, 2026

3 days ago

1mo newer

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

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.1 and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B).

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 53.2 to 22.1. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) 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 Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) 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%. Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) scores IFBench: 77.9%, GPQA: 72.4%, AA-LCR: 71.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 59.5%, SciCode: 34.9%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) 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 Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (53.2 vs 22.1), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs OpenMDW License v1.1). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B)?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and Nemotron Labs Dory 1.0 (4B) is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons