Claude Fable 5.2 vs o4-mini
Claude Fable 5.2 leads the LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 26.7. o4-mini is 8.3x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · OpenAI · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Fable 5.2 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 61.3 to 26.7, ranking #1 overall.
In the 1 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Fable 5.2 wins 1; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, o4-mini is roughly 8.3x 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 coding — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 1 of 1 exact shared results
- 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 o4-mini
- cost matters — it's about 8.3x 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 · 14 for o4-mini
Claude Fable 5.2 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (Humanity's Last Exam), while o4-mini is better at 0 benchmarks.
Claude Fable 5.2 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 7.3x more expensive than o4-mini ($1.10/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Fable 5.2 ($40.00/1M tokens) is 9.1x more expensive than o4-mini ($4.40/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Claude Fable 5.2 is more expensive than o4-mini.*
* 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 o4-mini's 200,000 tokens. Claude Fable 5.2 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while o4-mini is limited to 100,000 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Claude Fable 5.2 and o4-mini support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude Fable 5.2
o4-mini
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 o4-mini was released on 2025-04-16.
Claude Fable 5.2 is 19 months newer than o4-mini.
Nov 9, 2026
0 days ago
1.6yr newerApr 16, 2025
1.6 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Claude Fable 5.2 has a knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while o4-mini has a cutoff of 2024-05-31.
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 o4-mini (2024-05-31).
Jun 2026
2.1 yr newerMay 2024
Provider Availability
Claude Fable 5.2 is available from Anthropic. o4-mini is available from OpenAI.
Claude Fable 5.2
o4-mini
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Fable 5.2 and o4-mini side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Fable 5.2 vs o4-mini.