The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.2 vs EXAONE 4.5 33B

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 25.2.

Anthropic · LG AI Research · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 25.2, ranking #1 overall.

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 — it leads those capability indexes
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026

Choose EXAONE 4.5 33B

  • you are already invested in the LG AI Research ecosystem

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.2
Anthropic
EXAONE 4.5 33B
LG AI Research
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
61.3
#1
25.2
#192
Reasoning
60.3
#1
25.7
#185
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$8.00 / M
— / M
Output price
$40.00 / M
— / M
Context window
1,000,000
—

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

4 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.2
EXAONE 4.5 33B
Math
46.8#2
28.3#106
Vision
48.1#1
13.3#122
Tool use
37.1#2
9.8#159
Multimodal
44.5#1
16.0#106
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

29 reported for Claude Fable 5.2 · 15 for EXAONE 4.5 33B

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.2 and EXAONE 4.5 33Bdon'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

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Only Claude Fable 5.2 specifies input context (1,000,000 tokens). Only Claude Fable 5.2 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).

Anthropic
Claude Fable 5.2
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
LG AI Research
EXAONE 4.5 33B
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Nov 11 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Claude Fable 5.2 and EXAONE 4.5 33B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Claude Fable 5.2

Text
Images
Audio
Video

EXAONE 4.5 33B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Claude Fable 5.2

Proprietary

Closed source

EXAONE 4.5 33B

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.2 was released on 2026-11-09, while EXAONE 4.5 33B was released on 2026-04-09.

Claude Fable 5.2 is 7 months newer than EXAONE 4.5 33B.

Claude Fable 5.2

Nov 9, 2026

1 days ago

7mo newer
EXAONE 4.5 33B

Apr 9, 2026

7 months ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Fable 5.2 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while EXAONE 4.5 33B has a cutoff of 2024-12-01.

Claude Fable 5.2 has more recent training data (up to 2026-06-01), making it potentially better informed about events through that date compared to EXAONE 4.5 33B (2024-12-01).

Claude Fable 5.2

Jun 2026

1.5 yr newer
EXAONE 4.5 33B

Dec 2024

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.2 and EXAONE 4.5 33B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.2
✓ Preferred
EXAONE 4.5 33B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.2 vs EXAONE 4.5 33B.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.2 or EXAONE 4.5 33B?

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 25.2. Claude Fable 5.2 is made by Anthropic and EXAONE 4.5 33B is made by LG AI Research. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Claude Fable 5.2 compare to EXAONE 4.5 33B in benchmarks?

Claude Fable 5.2 scores SWE-bench Multilingual: 96.6%, Global-MMLU: 96.0%, MILU: 94.1%, SWE-Bench Pro: 93.0%, Chartography: 91.6%. EXAONE 4.5 33B scores AIME 2025: 92.9%, AIME 2026: 92.6%, IFEval: 89.6%, AI2D: 89.0%, MathVista-Mini: 85.0%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.2 and EXAONE 4.5 33B?

Claude Fable 5.2 supports 1.0M tokens and EXAONE 4.5 33B 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 5.2 and EXAONE 4.5 33B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (61.3 vs 25.2). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.2 and EXAONE 4.5 33B?

Claude Fable 5.2 is developed by Anthropic and EXAONE 4.5 33B is developed by LG AI Research.

Related comparisons