AI Models · Paid vs Paid

Claude Fable 5.1 Paid vs GPT-5.2 Chat Paid

Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.2 Chat compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Full 2026 breakdown.

Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai

Open-model prices = cheapest provider via OpenRouter; official maker rates may be higher.

Claude Fable 5.1PaidAnthropic
$10 /M input
$50 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
TypeProprietary
Context window1M tokens
MultimodalYes
Self-hostNo
GPT-5.2 ChatPaidOpenAI
$1.75 /M input
$14 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
TypeProprietary
Context window128K tokens
MultimodalYes
Self-hostNo
Choose GPT-5.2 Chat for the lower output price ($14/M vs $50/M). Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if you need the larger 1M context window.

Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.2 Chat specs

SpecClaude Fable 5.1GPT-5.2 ChatWinner
MakerAnthropicOpenAI
TypeProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M tokens128K tokensClaude Fable 5.1
Input price$10/M$1.75/MGPT-5.2 Chat
Output price$50/M$14/MGPT-5.2 Chat
Vision / multimodalYesYes= Tie
Tool / function callingYesYes= Tie
Self-hostableNo (API only)No (API only)
LicenseProprietaryProprietary

Price gap & when to choose each

3.6×cheaper per output token

GPT-5.2 Chat is ~3.6× cheaper than Claude Fable 5.1 on output tokens ($14 vs $50 per M tokens).

Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if…
  • 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
Choose GPT-5.2 Chat if…
  • 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

CapabilityClaude Fable 5.1GPT-5.2 Chat
Open weights (downloadable)
Self-hostable
Runs fully offline
Vision / multimodal
Tool / function calling
1M+ context window

Benchmarks: Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.2 Chat

Independent benchmark scores measured by Artificial Analysis. Higher is better (except latency).

Claude Fable 5.1
GPT-5.2 Chat
Intelligence index
53.4
17
Coding index
81.6
GPQA
93.7%
71.2%
Humanity's Last Exam
59.1%
8%
Long Context Reasoning
85.3%
45.7%
SciCode
63.1%
τ-Bench Banking
47.2%
11.1%
Terminal-Bench
91.4%
Math index
51
MMLU-Pro
81.4%
LiveCodeBench
66.9%
AIME 2025
51%
IFBench
47.4%
τ²-Bench
46.5%
Terminal-Bench Hard
31.8%
Speed
66.7 tok/s
0 tok/s
Latency
137.76s
0s
Intelligence per $
2.7
3.5

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.2 Chat score

🤝 Neck and neck on these criteria (2.9 vs 2.9 / 5).
CriterionClaude Fable 5.1GPT-5.2 Chat
Cost-efficiency2.03.5
Context window5.03.5
Openness1.51.5
Self-hosting1.01.0
Multimodality5.05.0

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 Paid

Anthropic · Proprietary

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...

GPT-5.2 Chat Paid

OpenAI · Proprietary

GPT-5.2 Chat (AKA Instant) is the fast, lightweight member of the 5.2 family, optimized for low-latency chat while retaining strong general intelligence. It uses adaptive reasoning to selectively “think” on...

Frequently asked questions

Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.2 Chat — which is cheaper?

GPT-5.2 Chat is cheaper on output ($14/M vs $50/M).

Which has the larger context window?

Claude Fable 5.1 offers the larger context window (1M tokens).

Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.2 Chat — which should I pick in 2026?

Choose GPT-5.2 Chat for the lower output price ($14/M vs $50/M). Choose Claude Fable 5.1 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 →