Skip to main content

Model comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Grok 4.3

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 16 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

83.68/100
Margin
18.6pts
← winning
65.1/100
1 category wins1 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Fable 5 #2 (Supported); Grok 4.3 #31 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Fable 5 and Grok 4.3 share 16 comparable benchmark results. 2 of 8 categories are comparable. 18 results are unique to Claude Fable 5; 9 to Grok 4.3.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
16
Claude Fable 5 only
18
Grok 4.3 only
9
Comparable categories
2 / 8

Pick Claude Fable 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Grok 4.3 only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 16 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 2 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Fable 5 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 83.68 to 65.1. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Fable 5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 89.2 against 47.3. Grok 4.3 does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Fable 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.25 input / $2.50 output per 1M tokens for Grok 4.3. That is roughly 20.0x on output cost alone. Claude Fable 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 1M for Grok 4.3.

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 scores and score margins for Claude Fable 5 and Grok 4.3
CategoryClaude Fable 5ΔGrok 4.3
CodingClaude Fable 589.2Margin 41.9Grok 4.347.3
MultimodalClaude Fable 557.9Margin 20.2Grok 4.378.1
AgenticClaude Fable 584.6MarginNo overlapGrok 4.3Not measured
KnowledgeClaude Fable 5Not measuredMarginNo overlapGrok 4.342.4
Inst. FollowingClaude Fable 5Not measuredMarginNo overlapGrok 4.381.3

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Fable 5Grok 4.3Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Fable 5$10 input / $50 outputGrok 4.3$1.25 input / $2.5 outputGrok 4.3 has the lower combined listed price.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Fable 5Not availableGrok 4.3209 tok/sA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Fable 5Not availableGrok 4.312.36 sA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Fable 51M+Grok 4.31MClaude Fable 5 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

Agentic
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Grok 4.3Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 84.3%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 85%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 17481085Claude Fable 5 leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 52.8%24.1%Claude Fable 5 leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 98.5%97.7%Claude Fable 5 leads
GDPval-AASource 62.4%29.2%Claude Fable 5 leads
AA BriefcaseSource 1574Not 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
APEX-Agents-AASource 17.0%Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 43.86%Not comparable
ResearchClawBenchSource 12.4%Not comparable
CodingClaude Fable 5 wins
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Grok 4.3Result
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%42.3%Claude Fable 5 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 60.2%47.3%Claude Fable 5 leads
SciCodeSource 47.3%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Grok 4.3Result
AA-LCRSource 70.0%64.3%Claude Fable 5 leads
CritPtSource 28.6%8.0%Claude Fable 5 leads
Knowledge
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Grok 4.3Result
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 59.9%37.6%Claude Fable 5 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.6%90.1%Claude Fable 5 leads
AA-HLESource 53.3%35.0%Claude Fable 5 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 40.2%18.3%Claude Fable 5 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 61.4%34.6%Claude Fable 5 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 54.9%25.0%Grok 4.3 leads
GPQASource 90.1%Not comparable
HLESource 35%Not comparable
MultimodalGrok 4.3 wins
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Grok 4.3Result
Blueprint-Bench 2Source 38.6%Not comparable
OfficeQA ProSource 57.9%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 13321225Claude Fable 5 leads
MMMU-ProSource 78.1%Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 78.1%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Grok 4.3Result
AA-IFBenchSource 63.5%81.3%Grok 4.3 leads
IFBenchSource 81.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (3)

Which is better, Claude Fable 5 or Grok 4.3?

Claude Fable 5 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 83.68 to 65.1.

Which is better for coding, Claude Fable 5 or Grok 4.3?

Claude Fable 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 89.2 versus 47.3. Inside this category, AA Coding Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Fable 5 or Grok 4.3?

Grok 4.3 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 78.1 versus 57.9. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 23, 2026

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.