AI Models · Paid vs Paid

Claude Fable 5.1 Paid vs SCSummarize Paid

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

Claude Fable 5.1 — full profile ›  ·  Summarize — full profile ›

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
SCSummarizePaidScaledown
$0.04 /M input
Free /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
TypeProprietary
Context window1M tokens
MultimodalYes
Self-hostNo
Choose Summarize for the lower output price (Free/M vs $50/M). Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if you need the larger 1M context window.

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Summarize specs

SpecClaude Fable 5.1SummarizeWinner
MakerAnthropicScaledown–
TypeProprietaryProprietary–
Context window1M tokens1M tokens= Tie
Input price$10/M$0.04/MSCSummarize
Output price$50/MFree/MSCSummarize
Vision / multimodalYesYes= Tie
Tool / function callingYesNoClaude Fable 5.1
Self-hostableNo (API only)No (API only)–
LicenseProprietaryProprietary–

Price gap & when to choose each

Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if…
  • You want frontier performance through a managed API
  • You value reliability & ecosystem
  • You don't want to manage infrastructure
SCChoose Summarize 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 5.1Summarize
Open weights (downloadable)✗✗
Self-hostable✗✗
Runs fully offline✗✗
Vision / multimodal✓✓
Tool / function calling✓✗
1M+ context window✓✓

Benchmarks: Claude Fable 5.1 vs Summarize

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

Claude Fable 5.1
Summarize
Intelligence index
53.4
–
Coding index
81.6
–
GPQA
93.7%
–
Humanity's Last Exam
59.1%
–
Long Context Reasoning
85.3%
–
SciCode
63.1%
–
τ-Bench Banking
47.2%
–
Terminal-Bench
91.4%
–
Speed
64.2 tok/s
–
Latency
138.66s
–
Intelligence per $
2.7
–

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How Claude Fable 5.1 and Summarize score

🏆 Best value & openness: Summarize (3.2 vs 2.9 / 5)
CriterionClaude Fable 5.1Summarize
Cost-efficiency2.05.0
Context window5.05.0
Openness1.51.5
Self-hosting1.01.0
Multimodality5.03.5

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 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...

Summarize Paid

Scaledown · Proprietary

Summarize is an abstractive summarization model from ScaleDown. It condenses long text and documents into a fluent, faithful rewrite rather than lifting sentences from the source, and is suited for...

Frequently asked questions

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Summarize — which is cheaper?

Summarize is cheaper on output (Free/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 Summarize — which should I pick in 2026?

Choose Summarize for the lower output price (Free/M vs $50/M). Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if you need the larger 1M context window.

People also compare

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs Claude Fable 5.1DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs SummarizeGLM 5.3 (batch) vs Claude Fable 5.1GLM 5.3 (batch) vs SummarizeHy3 vs Claude Fable 5.1Hy3 vs Summarize

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 →