Model comparison
Claude Fable 5 vs Grok Build 0.1
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Claude Fable 5 #2 (Supported); Grok Build 0.1 unranked (Not scored). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Claude Fable 5 and Grok Build 0.1 share 0 comparable benchmark results. 0 of 8 categories are comparable. 34 results are unique to Claude Fable 5; 1 to Grok Build 0.1.
Updated July 23, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Claude Fable 5 only
- 34
- Grok Build 0.1 only
- 1
- Comparable categories
- 0 / 8
Benchmark data for Claude Fable 5 and Grok Build 0.1 is coming soon on BenchLM.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 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 Fable 5 is priced at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $1.00 input / $2.00 output per 1M tokens for Grok Build 0.1. Claude Fable 5 has the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 256K for Grok Build 0.1.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5 | Grok Build 0.1 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Fable 5$10 input / $50 output | Grok Build 0.1$1 input / $2 output | Grok Build 0.1 has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Fable 5Not available | Grok Build 0.1Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Fable 5Not available | Grok Build 0.1Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Fable 51M+ | Grok Build 0.1256K | Claude Fable 5 lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Grok Build 0.1 | 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 |
| Gert LabsSource | — | 49.15% | Not comparable |
Coding9 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Grok Build 0.1 | 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 |
Reasoning2 benchmarks
Knowledge6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Grok Build 0.1 | 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 | Grok Build 0.1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | 63.5% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (3)
Can I compare Claude Fable 5 and Grok Build 0.1 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 Grok Build 0.1 today?
Claude Fable 5: $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens Grok Build 0.1: $1.00 input / $2.00 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.