Model comparison
Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking
Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Fable 5 #2 (Supported); Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Fable 5 and Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking share 1 comparable benchmark result. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 33 results are unique to Claude Fable 5; 1 to Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 1
- Claude Fable 5 only
- 33
- Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Fable 5 and Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 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 Fable 5 has the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 200K for Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking.
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 Fable 5 | Δ | Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | Claude Fable 584.6 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 4.5 ThinkingNot measured |
| Coding | Claude Fable 589.2 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 4.5 ThinkingNot measured |
| Multimodal | Claude Fable 557.9 | MarginNo overlap | Claude Sonnet 4.5 ThinkingNot measured |
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Fable 5$10 input / $50 output | Claude Sonnet 4.5 ThinkingNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Fable 5Not available | Claude Sonnet 4.5 ThinkingNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Fable 5Not available | Claude Sonnet 4.5 ThinkingNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Fable 51M+ | Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking200K | Claude Fable 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic13 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking | 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 |
Coding10 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| 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 |
| AA Coding IndexSource | 76.5% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | 60.2% | — | Not comparable |
| Vibe Code BenchSource | — | 22.62% | Not comparable |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | 59.9% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | 92.6% | — | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | 53.3% | — | Not comparable |
| 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 Fable 5 | Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 63.5% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude Fable 5 and Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking 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 Fable 5 and Claude Sonnet 4.5 Thinking today?
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.