AI Models · Paid vs Paid

Claude Fable 5 Paid vs Saba Paid

Claude Fable 5 vs Saba 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 5PaidAnthropic
$10 /M input
$50 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
TypeProprietary
Context window1M tokens
MultimodalYes
Self-hostNo
SabaPaidMistral AI
$0.2 /M input
$0.6 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
TypeProprietary
Context window33K tokens
MultimodalNo
Self-hostNo
Choose Saba for the lower output price ($0.6/M vs $50/M). Choose Claude Fable 5 if you need the larger 1M context window.

Claude Fable 5 vs Saba specs

SpecClaude Fable 5SabaWinner
MakerAnthropicMistral AI
TypeProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M tokens33K tokensClaude Fable 5
Input price$10/M$0.2/MSaba
Output price$50/M$0.6/MSaba
Vision / multimodalYesNoClaude Fable 5
Tool / function callingYesYes= Tie
Self-hostableNo (API only)No (API only)
LicenseProprietaryProprietary

Price gap & when to choose each

83×cheaper per output token

Saba is ~83× cheaper than Claude Fable 5 on output tokens ($0.6 vs $50 per M tokens).

Choose Claude Fable 5 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 Saba 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 5Saba
Open weights (downloadable)
Self-hostable
Runs fully offline
Vision / multimodal
Tool / function calling
1M+ context window

Benchmarks: Claude Fable 5 vs Saba

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

Claude Fable 5
Saba
Intelligence index
49.7
6.5
Coding index
76.5
GPQA
92.6%
42.4%
Humanity's Last Exam
55.5%
4.3%
Long Context Reasoning
82.3%
SciCode
61%
IFBench
63.5%
τ²-Bench
98.5%
τ-Bench Banking
38.1%
Terminal-Bench
84.6%
Terminal-Bench Hard
62.9%
MMLU-Pro
61.1%
MATH-500
67.7%
AIME
13%
Speed
70 tok/s
0 tok/s
Latency
60.71s
0s
Intelligence per $
2.5

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How Claude Fable 5 and Saba score

🤝 Neck and neck on these criteria (2.9 vs 2.7 / 5).
CriterionClaude Fable 5Saba
Cost-efficiency2.05.0
Context window5.02.5
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 Paid

Anthropic · Proprietary

Claude Fable 5 is a Mythos-class model from Anthropic, built for autonomous knowledge work and coding. It supports text, image, and file inputs with text output, with reasoning support and...

Saba Paid

Mistral AI · Proprietary

Mistral Saba is a 24B-parameter language model specifically designed for the Middle East and South Asia, delivering accurate and contextually relevant responses while maintaining efficient performance. Trained on curated regional...

Frequently asked questions

Claude Fable 5 vs Saba — which is cheaper?

Saba is cheaper on output ($0.6/M vs $50/M).

Which has the larger context window?

Claude Fable 5 offers the larger context window (1M tokens).

Claude Fable 5 vs Saba — which should I pick in 2026?

Choose Saba for the lower output price ($0.6/M vs $50/M). Choose Claude Fable 5 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 →