Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Haiku 4.5
Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison
Quick take
- •Claude Fable 5 leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks, including SWE-bench Verified (95.0% vs 73.3%).
- •Claude Fable 5 is meaningfully stronger at math (96 vs 68 on our capability index).
- •Claude Haiku 4.5 is meaningfully stronger at speed (98 vs 55).
- •Claude Haiku 4.5 is 90% cheaper on input tokens, which compounds fast on high-volume or agentic workloads.
- •Claude Fable 5 has a 1M context window vs 200K - better for whole-repo or long-document work.
Specs comparison
| Claude Fable 5 | Claude Haiku 4.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Type | Closed source | Closed source |
| Context window | ✓1M | 200K |
| Input / 1M tokens | $10.00 | ✓$1.00 |
| Output / 1M tokens | $50.00 | $5.00 |
| Release date | 2026-06 | 2025-10 |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Haiku 4.5 |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | ✓95.0% | 73.3% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | 88.0% | - |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.6% | - |
| SWE-bench Pro | 80.3% | - |
| GPQA | - | 64.6% |
| MMLU Pro | - | 80.0% |
Scores sourced from official provider release posts and independent benchmark aggregators.
Which should you choose?
Choose Claude Fable 5 if...
- →You need the absolute highest capability Anthropic offers for hard tasks
- →You run long, complex autonomous agents where quality compounds over many steps
- →You do frontier-level engineering, research, or analytics and cost is secondary
- →You want maximum accuracy on the toughest coding and reasoning benchmarks
Choose Claude Haiku 4.5 if...
- →You need high throughput and low latency at minimal cost
- →You are fanning out many parallel sub-agents or worker calls
- →You want solid coding/computer-use quality without Opus/Sonnet pricing
- →Your task fits comfortably within a 200K context window