Claude Fable 5 vs Command R+
Pricing, benchmarks, and use case comparison
Quick take
- •Claude Fable 5 is meaningfully stronger at multimodal (92 vs 5 on our capability index).
- •Command R+ is meaningfully stronger at speed (72 vs 55).
- •Command R+ is 75% cheaper on input tokens, which compounds fast on high-volume or agentic workloads.
- •Claude Fable 5 has a 1M context window vs 128K tokens - better for whole-repo or long-document work.
Specs comparison
| Claude Fable 5 | Command R+ | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Cohere |
| Type | Closed source | Closed source |
| Context window | ✓1M | 128K tokens |
| Input / 1M tokens | $10.00 | ✓$2.50 |
| Output / 1M tokens | $50.00 | $10.00 |
| Release date | 2026-06 | 2024-08 |
Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Command R+ |
|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench Verified | 95.0% | - |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | 88.0% | - |
| GPQA Diamond | 92.6% | - |
| SWE-bench Pro | 80.3% | - |
| RAG (BEIR) | - | Top-5 |
| MMLU | - | ~75% |
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 Command R+ if...
- →Your core use case is grounded RAG with citations
- →You need reliable multi-step tool/agent orchestration
- →You want an enterprise model available on Bedrock
- →You need multilingual responses across the 10 optimized languages