Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) Paid vs RERelace Search Paid
Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Relace Search compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Full 2026 breakdown.
Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) — full profile › · Relace Search — full profile ›
Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai
Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.
$25 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
$3 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Relace Search specs
| Spec | Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) | Relace Search | Winner |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | Relace | – |
| Type | Proprietary | Proprietary | – |
| Context window | 1M tokens | 256K tokens | |
| Input price | $5/M | $1/M | RERelace Search |
| Output price | $25/M | $3/M | RERelace Search |
| Vision / multimodal | Yes | No | |
| Tool / function calling | Yes | Yes | = Tie |
| Self-hostable | No (API only) | No (API only) | – |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary | – |
Price gap & when to choose each
Relace Search is ~8.3× cheaper than Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) on output tokens ($3 vs $25 per M tokens).
- You want frontier performance through a managed API
- You need the longer 1M context window
- You value reliability & ecosystem
- You don't want to manage infrastructure
- You want frontier performance through a managed API
- You want the lower output price
- You value reliability & ecosystem
- You don't want to manage infrastructure
Feature comparison
| Capability | Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) | Relace Search |
|---|---|---|
| Open weights (downloadable) | ✗ | ✗ |
| Self-hostable | ✗ | ✗ |
| Runs fully offline | ✗ | ✗ |
| Vision / multimodal | ✓ | ✗ |
| Tool / function calling | ✓ | ✓ |
| 1M+ context window | ✓ | ✗ |
Benchmarks: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Relace Search
Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).
Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.
How Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) and Relace Search score
| Criterion | Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) | Relace Search |
|---|---|---|
| Cost-efficiency | 3.0 | 4.0 |
| Context window | 5.0 | 4.0 |
| Openness | 1.5 | 1.5 |
| Self-hosting | 1.0 | 1.0 |
| Multimodality | 5.0 | 3.5 |
Scores come from live data — output price (cost), context length, open vs closed weights (openness & self-hosting) and vision/tool support (multimodality). Raw task quality isn't scored here; it depends on your benchmark — see the verdict.
What each model is
Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) Paid
Claude Fable 5.1 improves on Claude Fable 5 across the board, with the biggest gains in agentic coding, long-running agentic workflows, and knowledge work: long code refactors, front-end and visual...
Relace Search Paid
The relace-search model uses 4-12 `view_file` and `grep` tools in parallel to explore a codebase and return relevant files to the user request. In contrast to RAG, relace-search performs agentic...
Frequently asked questions
Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Relace Search — which is cheaper?
Relace Search is cheaper on output ($3/M vs $25/M).
Which has the larger context window?
Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) offers the larger context window (1M tokens).
Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Relace Search — which should I pick in 2026?
Choose Relace Search for the lower output price ($3/M vs $25/M). Choose Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) if you need the larger 1M context window.
People also compare
Explore more open-source AI
Browse the full open-source model leaderboard, thousands of tools and live benchmarks — all in one place.
Open the leaderboard →