The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 54.8 to 3.1. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is 320.0x cheaper per token.

Anthropic · Microsoft · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 54.8 to 3.1, ranking #5 overall.

On price, Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is roughly 320.0x 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 54.8 and ranks #5 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 Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

  • cost matters — it's about 320.0x 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
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Microsoft
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
54.8
#5
3.1
#296
Reasoning
52.1
#7
0.2
#302
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$10.00 / M
$0.05 / M
Output price
$50.00 / M
$0.10 / M
Context window
1,000,000
128,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.1
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Vision
40.5#1
2.2#163
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

7 reported for Claude Fable 5.1 · 15 for Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.1 and Phi-4-multimodal-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

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct costs less

For input processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 200.0x more expensive than Phi-4-multimodal-instruct ($0.05/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Fable 5.1 ($50.00/1M tokens) is 500.0x more expensive than Phi-4-multimodal-instruct ($0.10/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.1 is more expensive than Phi-4-multimodal-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
Microsoft
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Input tokens$0.05
Output tokens$0.10
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 Phi-4-multimodal-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
Microsoft
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Input128,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Wed Sep 02 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Fable 5.1 and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct 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

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Phi-4-multimodal-instruct uses MIT.

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

Claude Fable 5.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

MIT

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.1 was released on 2026-09-01, while Phi-4-multimodal-instruct was released on 2025-02-01.

Claude Fable 5.1 is 19 months newer than Phi-4-multimodal-instruct.

Claude Fable 5.1

Sep 1, 2026

1 days ago

1.6yr newer
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Feb 1, 2025

1.6 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2024-06-01, while Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Phi-4-multimodal-instruct's training data extends to 2024-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Fable 5.1's cutoff date.

Claude Fable 5.1

—

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

Jun 2024

Provider Availability

Claude Fable 5.1 is available from Anthropic. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is available from DeepInfra.

Claude Fable 5.1

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

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.05/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.10/1M
* 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 Phi-4-multimodal-instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.1
✓ Preferred
Phi-4-multimodal-instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.1 vs Phi-4-multimodal-instruct.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 54.8 to 3.1. Claude Fable 5.1 is made by Anthropic and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is made by Microsoft. 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 Phi-4-multimodal-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%. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct scores ScienceQA Visual: 97.5%, DocVQA: 93.2%, MMBench: 86.7%, POPE: 85.6%, OCRBench: 84.4%.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is 200.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic. Phi-4-multimodal-instruct costs $0.05/M input and $0.10/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.1 and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Phi-4-multimodal-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 Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (54.8 vs 3.1), context window (1.0M vs 128K), input pricing ($10.00 vs $0.05/M), licensing (Proprietary vs MIT). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.1 and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct?

Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic and Phi-4-multimodal-instruct is developed by Microsoft.

Related comparisons