Claude Fable 5.2 vs Ember-1
Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 42.5. Ember-1 is 2.7x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Fireworks AI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Fable 5.2 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 42.5, ranking #1 overall.
In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Ember-1 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Ember-1 is roughly 2.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Ember-1 also accepts a larger context window (1,040,000 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 5.2
- overall performance matters — it scores 61.3 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 Nov 2026
Choose Ember-1
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 2.7x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,040,000 token context window
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
29 reported for Claude Fable 5.2 · 4 for Ember-1
Claude Fable 5.2 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Ember-1 is better at 1 benchmark (DeepSWE 1.1).
Ember-1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Fable 5.2 ($8.00/1M tokens) is 2.7x more expensive than Ember-1 ($3.00/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Fable 5.2 ($40.00/1M tokens) is 2.7x more expensive than Ember-1 ($15.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.2 is more expensive than Ember-1.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Ember-1 accepts 1,040,000 input tokens compared to Claude Fable 5.2's 1,000,000 tokens. Only Claude Fable 5.2 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Claude Fable 5.2 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Ember-1 does not.
Claude Fable 5.2 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Claude Fable 5.2
Ember-1
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.
Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.
Proprietary
Closed source
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude Fable 5.2 was released on 2026-11-09, while Ember-1 was released on 2026-09-23.
Claude Fable 5.2 is 2 months newer than Ember-1.
Nov 9, 2026
0 days ago
1mo newerSep 23, 2026
1 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Claude Fable 5.2 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Ember-1's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Claude Fable 5.2's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Ember-1's cutoff date.
Jun 2026
—
Provider Availability
Claude Fable 5.2 is available from Anthropic. Ember-1 is available from Fireworks.
Claude Fable 5.2
Ember-1
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.2 and Ember-1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Fable 5.2 vs Ember-1.