AI Models · Open-Source vs Paid

THInkling Small Open vs Claude Fable 5.1 Paid

Inkling Small vs Claude Fable 5.1 compared — price per token, context window, multimodality, openness and which to choose. Can the open-source model replace the paid one? Full 2026 breakdown.

Prices & specs refreshed from live data · olud.ai

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

THInkling SmallOpenThinkingmachines
$0.45 /M input
$1.2 /M outputNo per-token fees if you self-host
TypeOpen-weight
Context window1M tokens
MultimodalYes
Self-hostYes
Claude Fable 5.1PaidAnthropic
$10 /M input
$50 /M outputManaged API (no infra to run)
TypeProprietary
Context window1M tokens
MultimodalYes
Self-hostNo
Choose Inkling Small if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

Inkling Small vs Claude Fable 5.1 specs

SpecInkling SmallClaude Fable 5.1Winner
MakerThinkingmachinesAnthropic
TypeOpen-weightProprietaryTHInkling Small
Context window1M tokens1M tokensTHInkling Small
Input price$0.45/M · free self-host$10/MTHInkling Small
Output price$1.2/M · free self-host$50/MTHInkling Small
Vision / multimodalYesYes= Tie
Tool / function callingYesYes= Tie
Self-hostableYesNo (API only)THInkling Small
LicenseOpen weightsProprietaryTHInkling Small

Price gap & when to choose each

42×cheaper per output token

Inkling Small is ~42× cheaper than Claude Fable 5.1 on output tokens ($1.2 vs $50 per M tokens).

THChoose Inkling Small if…
  • You want to self-host or run on your cloud
  • You need the longer 1M context window
  • You prioritize data privacy & control
  • You want the lowest operating costs
  • You are building open or reproducible AI
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

Feature comparison

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

Benchmarks: Inkling Small vs Claude Fable 5.1

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

Inkling Small delivers 18× more intelligence per dollar.
Inkling Small
Claude Fable 5.1
Intelligence index
26.1
53.4
Coding index
52.9
81.6
GPQA
89.5%
93.7%
Humanity's Last Exam
33.3%
59.1%
Long Context Reasoning
75.7%
85.3%
SciCode
49.7%
63.1%
τ-Bench Banking
18.8%
47.2%
Terminal-Bench
55.1%
91.4%
Speed
156.9 tok/s
66.7 tok/s
Latency
1.9s
137.76s
Intelligence per $
49.7
2.7

Benchmark data by Artificial Analysis.

How Inkling Small and Claude Fable 5.1 score

🏆 Best value & openness: Inkling Small (4.9 vs 2.9 / 5)
CriterionInkling SmallClaude Fable 5.1
Cost-efficiency4.52.0
Context window5.05.0
Openness5.01.5
Self-hosting5.01.0
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

Inkling Small Open

Thinkingmachines · Open-weight

Inkling Small is an open-weight multimodal mixture-of-experts model from Thinking Machines Lab, with 12B active parameters out of 276B total. It is positioned as the smaller, more efficient member of...

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...

Other models in these families

These variants are tracked but not compared here — one page per family keeps the comparison readable.

Other variants tracked
Inkling Small (batch)Inkling Small (free)InklingInkling (batch)Inkling (free)

Frequently asked questions

Is Inkling Small as good as Claude Fable 5.1?

Inkling Small is open-weight and competitive on many tasks, but Claude Fable 5.1 may still lead on the hardest reasoning and agentic work. The gap keeps narrowing — benchmark both on your actual use case before deciding.

Can I run Inkling Small locally?

Yes. Inkling Small has open weights, so you can self-host it on your own GPUs or run it via a low-cost API. Claude Fable 5.1 is API-only and cannot be self-hosted.

How much cheaper is Inkling Small?

Inkling Small costs $1.2/M output vs $50/M for Claude Fable 5.1 — roughly 42x cheaper via API, and free if you self-host.

Inkling Small vs Claude Fable 5.1 — which should I pick in 2026?

Choose Inkling Small if you want to self-host, keep your data private and skip per-token fees — it's open-weight and runs on your own hardware. Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if you want frontier capability through a managed API with zero infrastructure to run.

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 →