Model comparison
Claude 3 Opus vs Claude Fable 5
Head-to-head evidence from 5 shared benchmark results across 2 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude 3 Opus #168 (Supported); Claude Fable 5 #2 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude 3 Opus and Claude Fable 5 share 5 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 0 results are unique to Claude 3 Opus; 29 to Claude Fable 5.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 5
- Claude 3 Opus only
- 0
- Claude Fable 5 only
- 29
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude 3 Opus and Claude Fable 5 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 5 shared benchmark results across 2 evidence categories; 0 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
BenchLM has partial data for these models, but not enough overlapping benchmark coverage to produce a fair score-level comparison yet.
Claude 3 Opus is priced at $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens for Claude Fable 5. Claude Fable 5 has the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 200K for Claude 3 Opus.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude 3 Opus | Δ | Claude Fable 5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude 3 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Fable 584.6 |
| Coding | Claude 3 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Fable 589.2 |
| Multimodal | Claude 3 OpusNot measured | MarginNo overlap | Claude Fable 557.9 |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Fable 5 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude 3 Opus$15 input / $75 output | Claude Fable 5$10 input / $50 output | Claude Fable 5 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude 3 OpusNot available | Claude Fable 5Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude 3 OpusNot available | Claude Fable 5Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude 3 Opus200K | Claude Fable 51M+ | Claude Fable 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Fable 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 84.3% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 85% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1748 | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 52.8% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 98.5% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 62.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1574 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 48.6% | Not comparable |
| AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource | — | 51.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 93.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 26.8% | Not comparable |
| terminalBenchHardSource | — | 62.9% | Not comparable |
| aaTerminalBench21Source | — | 84.6% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Fable 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding IndexSource | 19.5% | 76.5% | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 23.3% | 60.2% | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | — | 95% | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | — | 80% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource | — | 53.5% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 84.3% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench31Source | — | 70.6% | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | — | 70.5% | Not comparable |
| VulcanBench v3Source | — | 87.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Fable 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 11.8% | 59.9% | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 48.9% | 92.6% | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| AA-HLESource | 3.1% | 53.3% | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 40.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 61.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 54.9% | Not comparable |
Multimodal3 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude 3 Opus | Claude Fable 5 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 63.5% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude 3 Opus and Claude Fable 5 on BenchLM yet?
Not fully yet. BenchLM is tracking both models, but the sourced benchmark breakdown for this comparison is still coming soon.
Why does this comparison show “coming soon”?
BenchLM only shows category winners and benchmark-level calls when we have sourced results that can be compared fairly. For these models, the public benchmark coverage is not complete enough yet.
What data is available for Claude 3 Opus and Claude Fable 5 today?
Claude 3 Opus: $15.00 input / $75.00 output per 1M tokens Claude Fable 5: $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens Both model pages still include creator, context window, reasoning mode, and other metadata while benchmark coverage fills in.
Related Comparisons
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.