The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 4.1.

Anthropic · NVIDIA · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 4.1, 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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Claude Fable 5.2
Anthropic
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
NVIDIA
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
61.3
#1
4.1
#344
Reasoning
60.3
#1
4.7
#335
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

1 shared
Index
Claude Fable 5.2
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
Math
46.8#2
8.8#279
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

29 reported for Claude Fable 5.2 · 7 for Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1

No common benchmarks found

Claude Fable 5.2 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1don'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
NVIDIA
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
Input- tokens
Output- tokens
Wed Nov 11 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Claude Fable 5.2 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 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

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Claude Fable 5.2 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 uses Llama 3.1 Community License.

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

Claude Fable 5.2

Proprietary

Closed source

Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1

Llama 3.1 Community License

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Fable 5.2 was released on 2026-11-09, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 was released on 2025-03-18.

Claude Fable 5.2 is 20 months newer than Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1.

Claude Fable 5.2

Nov 9, 2026

0 days ago

1.6yr newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1

Mar 18, 2025

1.6 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Fable 5.2 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 has a cutoff of 2023-12-31.

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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 (2023-12-31).

Claude Fable 5.2

Jun 2026

2.5 yr newer
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1

Dec 2023

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.2 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude Fable 5.2
✓ Preferred
Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Fable 5.2 vs Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1.

Which is better, Claude Fable 5.2 or Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1?

Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 4.1. Claude Fable 5.2 is made by Anthropic and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 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 5.2 compare to Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 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%. Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 scores MATH-500: 95.4%, MBPP: 84.6%, MT-Bench: 81.0%, IFEval: 79.3%, BFCL v2: 63.6%.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Fable 5.2 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1?

Claude Fable 5.2 supports 1.0M tokens and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 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 Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (61.3 vs 4.1), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Llama 3.1 Community License). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude Fable 5.2 and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1?

Claude Fable 5.2 is developed by Anthropic and Llama 3.1 Nemotron Nano 8B V1 is developed by NVIDIA.

Related comparisons