Claude Fable 5.2 vs K-EXAONE-236B-A23B
Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 25.4. K-EXAONE-236B-A23B is 22.9x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · LG AI Research · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Fable 5.2 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 25.4, ranking #1 overall.
On price, K-EXAONE-236B-A23B is roughly 22.9x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Claude Fable 5.2 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 5.2
- overall performance matters — it scores 61.3 and ranks #1 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — 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 Nov 2026
Choose K-EXAONE-236B-A23B
- cost matters — it's about 22.9x cheaper per token
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 · 6 for K-EXAONE-236B-A23B
Claude Fable 5.2 and K-EXAONE-236B-A23Bdon'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
For input processing, Claude Fable 5.2 ($8.00/1M tokens) is 13.3x more expensive than K-EXAONE-236B-A23B ($0.60/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Fable 5.2 ($40.00/1M tokens) is 40.0x more expensive than K-EXAONE-236B-A23B ($1.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.2 is more expensive than K-EXAONE-236B-A23B.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Claude Fable 5.2 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to K-EXAONE-236B-A23B's 32,768 tokens. Claude Fable 5.2 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while K-EXAONE-236B-A23B is limited to 32,768 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Claude Fable 5.2 supports multimodal inputs, whereas K-EXAONE-236B-A23B 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
K-EXAONE-236B-A23B
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 K-EXAONE-236B-A23B was released on 2025-12-31.
Claude Fable 5.2 is 10 months newer than K-EXAONE-236B-A23B.
Nov 9, 2026
0 days ago
10mo newerDec 31, 2025
10 months ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Claude Fable 5.2 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while K-EXAONE-236B-A23B has a cutoff of 2025-10-01.
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 K-EXAONE-236B-A23B (2025-10-01).
Jun 2026
8 mo newerOct 2025
Provider Availability
Claude Fable 5.2 is available from Anthropic. K-EXAONE-236B-A23B is available from FriendliAI.
Claude Fable 5.2
K-EXAONE-236B-A23B
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.2 and K-EXAONE-236B-A23B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Fable 5.2 vs K-EXAONE-236B-A23B.