Compare · ModelsLive · 3 picked · head to head
Claude Fable 5 vs GPT-5.4 vs Claude Opus 4.8 (Fast)
Side by side · benchmarks, pricing, and signals you can act on.
Winner summary
Claude Fable 5 wins on 10/12 benchmarks
Claude Fable 5 wins 10 of 12 shared benchmarks. Leads in speed · agentic · arena.
Category leads
speed·Claude Fable 5agentic·Claude Fable 5arena·Claude Fable 5knowledge·GPT-5.4math·Claude Fable 5coding·Claude Fable 5
Hype vs Reality
Attention vs performance
Claude Fable 5
#12 by perf·no signal
GPT-5.4
#61 by perf·no signal
Claude Opus 4.8 (Fast)
no bench·no signal
Best value
GPT-5.4
2.7x better value than Claude Fable 5
Claude Fable 5
2.5 pts/$
$30.00/M
GPT-5.4
6.7 pts/$
$8.75/M
Claude Opus 4.8 (Fast)
—
$30.00/M
Vendor risk
Who is behind the model
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
OpenAI
$840.0B·Tier 1
Anthropic
$380.0B·Tier 1
Head to head
12 benchmarks · 3 models
Claude Fable 5GPT-5.4Claude Opus 4.8 (Fast)
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index
GPT-5.4 leads by +16.6
Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?"
Claude Fable 5
52.8
GPT-5.4
69.4
Claude Opus 4.8 (Fast)
47.2
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index
Claude Fable 5 leads by +2.2
Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads.
Claude Fable 5
76.5
GPT-5.4
57.3
Claude Opus 4.8 (Fast)
74.3
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index
Claude Fable 5 leads by +2.7
Claude Fable 5
59.9
GPT-5.4
57.2
Claude Opus 4.8 (Fast)
55.7
APEX-Agents
Claude Fable 5 leads by +9.1
APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments.
Claude Fable 5
45.0
GPT-5.4
35.9
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding
Claude Fable 5 leads by +242.8
Claude Fable 5
1653.9
GPT-5.4
1411.1
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall
Claude Fable 5 leads by +39.9
Claude Fable 5
1507.6
GPT-5.4
1467.7
Chess Puzzles
GPT-5.4 leads by +3.0
Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities.
Claude Fable 5
41.0
GPT-5.4
44.0
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private
Claude Fable 5 leads by +38.8
Claude Fable 5
87.8
GPT-5.4
49.0
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private
Claude Fable 5 leads by +8.4
Claude Fable 5
87.0
GPT-5.4
78.6
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025
Claude Fable 5 leads by +4.4
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills.
Claude Fable 5
99.7
GPT-5.4
95.3
SimpleQA Verified
Claude Fable 5 leads by +23.5
SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information.
Claude Fable 5
68.3
GPT-5.4
44.8
WeirdML
Claude Fable 5 leads by +10.1
WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns.
Claude Fable 5
87.8
GPT-5.4
77.7
Full benchmark table
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | GPT-5.4 | Claude Opus 4.8 (Fast) |
|---|---|---|---|
Artificial Analysis · Agentic Index Artificial Analysis Agentic Index · a composite score measuring how well a model performs in agentic workflows · multi-step tool use, planning, error recovery, and autonomous task completion. Aggregates results from multiple agentic benchmarks including SWE-bench, tool-use tests, and planning evaluations. The canonical single-number metric for "how good is this model as an agent?" | 52.8 | 69.4 | 47.2 |
Artificial Analysis · Coding Index Artificial Analysis Coding Index · a composite score that aggregates performance across multiple coding benchmarks into a single index. Tracks code generation quality, debugging ability, multi-language competence, and real-world software engineering tasks. Used by Artificial Analysis to rank model coding capability in a normalized, comparable format. Useful for developers choosing between models for coding-heavy workloads. | 76.5 | 57.3 | 74.3 |
Artificial Analysis · Quality Index | 59.9 | 57.2 | 55.7 |
APEX-Agents APEX-Agents · evaluates AI agents on complex, multi-step tasks requiring planning, tool use, and autonomous decision-making in realistic environments. | 45.0 | 35.9 | — |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Coding | 1653.9 | 1411.1 | — |
Chatbot Arena Elo · Overall | 1507.6 | 1467.7 | — |
Chess Puzzles Chess Puzzles · tests strategic and tactical reasoning by having models solve chess puzzle positions, evaluating lookahead and pattern recognition abilities. | 41.0 | 44.0 | — |
FrontierMath-Tier-4-v2-Private | 87.8 | 49.0 | — |
FrontierMath-Tiers-1-3-v2-Private | 87.0 | 78.6 | — |
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 · simulated American Invitational Mathematics Examination problems testing advanced problem-solving skills. | 99.7 | 95.3 | — |
SimpleQA Verified SimpleQA Verified · short factual questions with verified answers, measuring factual accuracy and the tendency to hallucinate or provide incorrect information. | 68.3 | 44.8 | — |
WeirdML WeirdML · tests models on unusual and adversarial machine learning tasks that require creative problem-solving beyond standard patterns. | 87.8 | 77.7 | — |
Pricing · per 1M tokens · projected $/mo at 10M tokens
| Model | Input | Output | Context | Projected $/mo |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| $10.00 | $50.00 | 1.0M tokens (~500 books) | $200.00 | |
| $2.50 | $15.00 | 1.1M tokens (~525 books) | $56.25 | |
| $10.00 | $50.00 | 1.0M tokens (~500 books) | $200.00 |