Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Sonnet 5

Select two models to compare their coding performance, pricing, and features.

Key Takeaways

Coding tier: Claude Fable 5 has a higher reference index on the selected shared benchmark configuration than Claude Sonnet 5 (114.18 vs 105.06, a 9.12-point difference). This does not by itself establish general coding superiority. Editorial tiers: Claude Fable 5 = S; Claude Sonnet 5 = A. Tiers are separate editorial assessments and do not establish a reliable order within a tier.
API cost estimate: Estimated 1M in / 200K out tokens: $20.0000 (Claude Fable 5) vs $4.0000 (Claude Sonnet 5).
Metric Claude Fable 5 Claude Sonnet 5
Coding Index
114.18
105.06
Coding tier S A
Input Price $10/1M $2/1M
Output Price $50/1M $10/1M
Context Window 1M 1M

Coding Index

Coding Index · Reference baseline: 100

Claude Fable 5 114.18
Claude Sonnet 5 105.06

Integer index difference: 9.12

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 = 100. The index reflects two shared tests, not capability multiples or statistically established gaps.

Verdict

The models have different editorial tier assessments. The index is supplementary and cannot predict performance on every development task.

Capabilities & Use Cases Comparison

Claude Fable 5 Tier S

Best For
  • •Complex architecture
  • •Multi-file refactoring
  • •Claude Code
  • •Code review
Strengths
  • •Highest coding benchmark score
  • •Adaptive reasoning with Opus fallback
  • •Top-tier architecture design
  • •Best for complex coding tasks

Claude Sonnet 5 Tier A

Claude Fable 5

OpenRouter quote 2026-10-11
Benchmark evidence and ranking method · Claude Fable 5

Cross-checked

Terminal-Bench 4.0 · Claude Code · max: 44.55% · 95% CI ± 3.85%

Artificial Analysis · Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback)

Test configuration: max

Terminal-Bench 2.1: 84.64% · SciCode: 61.00%

LiveBench · 2026-06-25 · claude-fable-5-max-effort

Coding: 85.99% · Agentic Coding: 62.17%

ModelRank assigns editorial tiers using public coding evidence, not automatic index thresholds or statistically proven classes. Price, speed, context size and sponsorship do not affect tiers.

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 = 100. The index reflects two shared tests, not capability multiples or statistically established gaps.

Results reflect particular model configurations. Agent harnesses, reasoning effort, tools, budgets and tasks may differ. Close indices do not establish superiority. B describes a relative position in this selected group, not an inability to code.

Data checked: 2026-09-10. Snapshot date is the retrieval date, not necessarily the evaluation date.

Claude Sonnet 5

OpenRouter quote 2026-10-11
Benchmark evidence and ranking method · Claude Sonnet 5

Cross-checked

Terminal-Bench 4.0 · Claude Code · max: 12.42% · 95% CI ± 3.06%

Artificial Analysis · Claude Sonnet 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort)

Test configuration: max

Terminal-Bench 2.1: 80.52% · SciCode: 54.28%

LiveBench · 2026-06-25 · claude-sonnet-5-xhigh-effort

Coding: 80.68% · Agentic Coding: 59.39%

ModelRank assigns editorial tiers using public coding evidence, not automatic index thresholds or statistically proven classes. Price, speed, context size and sponsorship do not affect tiers.

DeepSeek V4 Flash 0731 = 100. The index reflects two shared tests, not capability multiples or statistically established gaps.

Results reflect particular model configurations. Agent harnesses, reasoning effort, tools, budgets and tasks may differ. Close indices do not establish superiority. B describes a relative position in this selected group, not an inability to code.

Data checked: 2026-09-10. Snapshot date is the retrieval date, not necessarily the evaluation date.

Results reflect particular model configurations. Agent harnesses, reasoning effort, tools, budgets and tasks may differ. Close indices do not establish superiority. B describes a relative position in this selected group, not an inability to code.

API cost estimate

1M input + 200K output (USD):

Claude Fable 5: $20.0000

Claude Sonnet 5: $4.0000

Estimates use the displayed channel and time band; DeepSeek uses peak rates. Cache discounts, tool fees, long-context price tiers and uncounted additional tokens are excluded.

Frequently Asked Questions

Which model is better for coding: Claude Fable 5 or Claude Sonnet 5?

Claude Fable 5 has a higher reference index on the selected shared benchmark configuration than Claude Sonnet 5 (114.18 vs 105.06, a 9.12-point difference). This does not by itself establish general coding superiority. Editorial tiers: Claude Fable 5 = S; Claude Sonnet 5 = A. Tiers are separate editorial assessments and do not establish a reliable order within a tier.

How do Claude Fable 5 and Claude Sonnet 5 compare in API pricing and costs?

Claude Fable 5: $10/1M input, $50/1M output (OpenRouter quote); Claude Sonnet 5: $2/1M input, $10/1M output (OpenRouter quote). 1M input + 200K output (USD): $20.0000 vs $4.0000.

What are the context window sizes of Claude Fable 5 and Claude Sonnet 5?

Claude Fable 5 provides a 1,000,000 token context window, while Claude Sonnet 5 provides 1,000,000 tokens.

Try Claude Fable 5 → Try Claude Sonnet 5 →