For Developers/Models/Compare/Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6

Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Sonnet 4.6

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 79.6%).
  • Claude Fable 5 is meaningfully stronger at math (96 vs 80 on our capability index).
  • Claude Sonnet 4.6 is meaningfully stronger at cost efficiency (84 vs 55).
  • Claude Sonnet 4.6 is 70% cheaper on input tokens, which compounds fast on high-volume or agentic workloads.

Specs comparison

Claude Fable 5Claude Sonnet 4.6
ProviderAnthropicAnthropic
TypeClosed sourceClosed source
Context window1M1M
Input / 1M tokens$10.00$3.00
Output / 1M tokens$50.00$15.00
Release date2026-062026-02

Benchmarks

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5Claude Sonnet 4.6
SWE-bench Verified95.0%79.6%
Terminal-Bench 2.188.0%-
GPQA Diamond92.6%-
SWE-bench Pro80.3%-
Terminal-Bench 2.0-59.1%
OSWorld-Verified-72.5%
GPQA-79.7%

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
Full Claude Fable 5 details →

Choose Claude Sonnet 4.6 if...

  • You have an existing integration pinned to Sonnet 4.6 and want stability
  • You need a proven mid-tier model with 1M context at $3/$15
  • You want predictable behavior without the new-tokenizer/thinking changes in Sonnet 5
  • You are cost-sensitive and don't need Sonnet 5's incremental gains
Full Claude Sonnet 4.6 details →

Compare Claude Fable 5 with others