Model Comparison

Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Fable 5Which is better in 2026?

Claude Fable 5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.5 is 2.0x cheaper per token.

Verdict: Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Fable 5 — which is better?

Claude Opus 4.5 (by Anthropic) and Claude Fable 5 (by Anthropic) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

Claude Opus 4.5 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Claude Fable 5 is better at 1 benchmark (SWE-Bench Verified). Claude Fable 5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

On price, Claude Opus 4.5 is roughly 2.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Claude Fable 5 also accepts a larger context window (1,000,000 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose Claude Opus 4.5 if…

  • cost matters — it's about 2.0x cheaper per token

Choose Claude Fable 5 if…

  • you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,000,000 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jun 2026
Want to compare interactively?Try the playground

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

1 benchmarks

Claude Opus 4.5 outperforms in 0 benchmarks, while Claude Fable 5 is better at 1 benchmark (SWE-Bench Verified).

Claude Fable 5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.

Tue Jun 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Claude Opus 4.5 costs less

For input processing, Claude Opus 4.5 ($5.00/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Claude Fable 5 ($10.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude Opus 4.5 ($25.00/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Claude Fable 5 ($50.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Claude Fable 5 is more expensive than Claude Opus 4.5.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Tue Jun 09 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.5
Input tokens$5.00
Output tokens$25.00
Best providerAnthropic
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5
Input tokens$10.00
Output tokens$50.00
Best providerAnthropic
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Claude Fable 5 accepts 1,000,000 input tokens compared to Claude Opus 4.5's 200,000 tokens. Claude Fable 5 can generate longer responses up to 128,000 tokens, while Claude Opus 4.5 is limited to 64,000 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.5
Input200,000 tokens
Output64,000 tokens
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5
Input1,000,000 tokens
Output128,000 tokens
Tue Jun 09 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Both Claude Opus 4.5 and Claude Fable 5 support multimodal inputs.

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

Claude Opus 4.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Claude Fable 5

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 Opus 4.5

Proprietary

Closed source

Claude Fable 5

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude Opus 4.5 was released on 2025-11-24, while Claude Fable 5 was released on 2026-06-09.

Claude Fable 5 is 7 months newer than Claude Opus 4.5.

Claude Opus 4.5

Nov 24, 2025

6 months ago

Claude Fable 5

Jun 9, 2026

0 days ago

6mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Claude Opus 4.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2025-03-31, while Claude Fable 5's cutoff date is not specified.

We can confirm Claude Opus 4.5's training data extends to 2025-03-31, but cannot make a direct comparison without Claude Fable 5's cutoff date.

Claude Opus 4.5

Mar 2025

Claude Fable 5

—

Provider Availability

Claude Opus 4.5 is available from Anthropic. Claude Fable 5 is available from Anthropic.

Claude Opus 4.5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $5.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $25.00/1M

Claude Fable 5

anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $10.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $50.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Anthropic
Larger context window (1,000,000 tokens)
Higher SWE-Bench Verified score (95.0% vs 80.9%)

Detailed Comparison

AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude Opus 4.5
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5

FAQ

Common questions about Claude Opus 4.5 vs Claude Fable 5.

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.5 or Claude Fable 5?

Claude Fable 5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Claude Opus 4.5 is made by Anthropic and Claude Fable 5 is made by Anthropic. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their benchmark scores, pricing, and capabilities above.

How does Claude Opus 4.5 compare to Claude Fable 5 in benchmarks?

Claude Opus 4.5 scores Tau2 Telecom: 98.2%, MMMLU: 90.8%, Tau2 Retail: 88.9%, GPQA: 87.0%, SWE-Bench Verified: 80.9%. Claude Fable 5 scores SWE-Bench Verified: 95.0%, OSWorld-Verified: 85.0%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 84.3%, SWE-Bench Pro: 80.0%, ExploitBench: 78.0%.

Is Claude Opus 4.5 cheaper than Claude Fable 5?

Claude Opus 4.5 is 2.0x cheaper for input tokens. Claude Opus 4.5 costs $5.00/M input and $25.00/M output via anthropic. Claude Fable 5 costs $10.00/M input and $50.00/M output via anthropic.

What are the context window sizes for Claude Opus 4.5 and Claude Fable 5?

Claude Opus 4.5 supports 200K tokens and Claude Fable 5 supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude Opus 4.5 and Claude Fable 5?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($5.00 vs $10.00/M). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Related comparisons