Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Fable 5.2 leads Claude Opus 5.5 on coding, 87.8 to 87.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Claude Opus 5.5 costs 2.0x less per output token ($20.00 vs $40.00 per million). Updated November 14, 2026; 67 benchmarks have a result for both.
vs boards won of 67 shared, 3 tied
Claude Fable 5.2 or Claude Opus 5.5: which to pick
Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Opus 5.5 are level for coding, 87.8 against 87.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, so price and context decide.
Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for output tokens 2.0x cheaper ($20.00 vs $40.00 per million) and work measured by LiveBench coding or SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI), where it leads. Pick Claude Fable 5.2 for work measured by LMArena WebDev or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.
Model AClaude Fable 5.2Anthropic87.8/1004 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved taskModel BClaude Opus 5.5Anthropic87.3/1005 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task
- Shared results
- 67
- Claude Fable 5.2 only
- 1
- Claude Opus 5.5 only
- 71
- Like-for-like categories
- 8 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Level: 87.8 against 87.3, inside 2 points.
4 and 5 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Claude Fable 5.2
Claude Fable 5.2 leads, 64.6 against 59.1.
Same board, both measured
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Claude Fable 5.2
Claude Fable 5.2 leads, 1351 against 1326.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
Claude Fable 5.2
Claude Fable 5.2 leads, 71.3% against 70.1%.
Same board, both measured
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 1M tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Fable 5.2 $0.028, Claude Opus 5.5 $0.014 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Fable 5.2 87.8 from 4 benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 87.3 from 5 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Knowledge, 10.8 points apart on average over 3 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- SimpleQA Verified: Claude Fable 5.2 94.0% against Claude Opus 5.5 72.2%, 21.8 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Fable 5.2 $40.00 against Claude Opus 5.5 $20.00 per million output tokens, 2.0x apart.
- Context window
- Both take 1M tokens.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Claude Fable 5.2 | Bars | Claude Opus 5.5 | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 12 | 2 | 1 tie | |
| Intelligence | 2 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 11 | 4 | ||
| Reasoning | 12 | 1 | 1 tie | |
| Math | 3 | 1 | 1 tie | |
| Knowledge | 3 | 0 | ||
| Web design | 3 | 3 | ||
| General | 5 | 2 | ||
| All shared boards | 51 | 13 | 3 ties |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index122
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 79.2% | 87.1% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1838 | 1815 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 65.2% | 65.2% | Tie |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 93.8% | 90.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 66.7% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 19.0% | 18.5% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| IOI (Vals AI) | Not measured | 95.1% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 87.6% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | 62.3% | 70.2% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 30.4% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| CyberBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 74.6% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| SciCode | 67.7% | 66.9% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Artificial Analysis run) | 61.6% | 59.6% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| FrontierCode 2.0 | 49.1% | 46.4% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| FrontierCode | Not measured | 54.6% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| FrontierSWE | 69.9% | 62.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| MirrorCode | Not measured | 95.6% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 2509.8 | 2147.4 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMArena Text: coding | Not measured | 1543 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: software and IT | Not measured | 1533 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1915 | 1868 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1738 | 1727 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMArena WebDev: from an image | Not measured | 1752 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| SciCode | Not measured | 18.5% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| GameBench 2 | 99.1 | 94.8 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | Not measured | 64.8% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| CursorBench 4.0 | 60.0% | 57.8% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| ProgramBench | Not measured | 18.5% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 24 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 64.6 | 59.1 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 173.4 | 168.5 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index114
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1321 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | 1402 | 1390 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1325 | 1294 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1392 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: agents building games | Not measured | 1456 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | Not measured | 1471 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: PowerPoint slides | Not measured | 1391 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: spreadsheets | 1434 | 1328 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LiveBench research | 94.5% | 88.9% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LiveBench browser | 86.9% | 88.4% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| LiveBench long agentic | 82.9% | 72.8% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| SREBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 33.6% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 58.6% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 32.1% | 44.5% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 46.1% | 50.5% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 5.0% | 9.2% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 75.9% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | 83.7% | 79.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | 55.7% | 47.1% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Vals Science Index | 63.7% | 58.7% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Time Horizon Index (Vals AI) | Not measured | 91.3% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| CUA-bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 14.0% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Robo-bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 14.6% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| APEX-Agents | 80.1% | 73.5% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Remote Labor Index | 41.3% | 21.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| PostTrainBench | Not measured | 43.8% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| SpireClimb | 15.5% | 5.8% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Not measured | $9,235 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Search | Not measured | 1213 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| MCP Atlas | Not measured | 85.4% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index121
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench reasoning | 88.8% | 92.2% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | 51.8% | 49.5% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 74.3% | 61.4% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| HLE-Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 80.2% | 67.9% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| CritPt v2, hard subset (Artificial Analysis run) | 76.5% | 68.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 93.9% | 90.6% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| ARC-AGI | 98.5% | 98.5% | Tie |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 93.8% | 93.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| SimpleBench | 94.9% | 88.4% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Chess puzzles | 79.0% | 67.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Mystery game puzzles | 90.0% | 71.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| EBR-bench | 90.5% | 71.4% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts | Not measured | 1531 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: expert | Not measured | 1555 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: hard prompts in English | Not measured | 1536 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: diagrams | Not measured | 1354 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: homework | Not measured | 1357 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Scale run) | 72.4% | 55.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| GoBench | 2566 | 2274 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index31
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 99.7% | 100.0% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 95.1% | 91.2% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 100.0% | 95.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| ProofBench | 100.0% | 100.0% | Tie |
| LMArena Text: math | Not measured | 1520 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: mathematical work | Not measured | 1532 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| MathArena | 82.8% | 75.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index30
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 49.8% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| AA-Omniscience | 66.8 | 48.1 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| SimpleQA Verified | 94.0% | 72.2% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMArena Text: science | Not measured | 1525 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare | Not measured | 1511 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: legal and government | Not measured | 1519 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: business and finance | Not measured | 1494 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| FACTS Benchmark Suite | Not measured | 66.5% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| PRBench Finance | 47.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| PRBench Legal | 49.0% | 47.6% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index33
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1351 | 1326 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1371 | 1377 | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1396 | 1427 | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1387 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1517 | 1460 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1373 | 1384 | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1320 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1354 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LiveBench design | 85.1% | 83.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index52
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 71.3% | 70.1% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LiveBench data analysis | 81.5% | 80.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 70.6% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| SAGE (Vals AI) | Not measured | 91.3% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 91.4% | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 83.3% | 84.7% | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| GDPval-AA | 1831 | 1866 | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| DTBench | 99.2% | 98.9% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMCA | 70.6% | 68.2% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Furniture assembly | 90.0% | 83.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMArena Text | Not measured | 1514 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: instruction following | Not measured | 1535 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: creative writing | Not measured | 1532 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision | Not measured | 1324 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: English | Not measured | 1521 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: non-English | Not measured | 1503 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Chinese | Not measured | 1573 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: German | Not measured | 1513 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Japanese | Not measured | 1527 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Korean | Not measured | 1505 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: French | Not measured | 1498 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Spanish | Not measured | 1510 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Russian | Not measured | 1517 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: Polish | Not measured | 1511 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: multi-turn | Not measured | 1502 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: longer queries | Not measured | 1528 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: writing and language | Not measured | 1528 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Text: entertainment and media | Not measured | 1508 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: English | Not measured | 1321 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: Chinese | Not measured | 1380 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: reading text | Not measured | 1332 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: humor | Not measured | 1267 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| LMArena Vision: creative writing | Not measured | 1317 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| EQ-Bench 4 | Not measured | 1340 | Only Claude Opus 5.5 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Claude Fable 5.2$0.028Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5$0.014Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5 costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Claude Fable 5.2$0.520Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5$0.260Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5 costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Claude Fable 5.2$2.00Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5$1.00Fits in one request
Claude Opus 5.5 costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Anthropic Claude Fable 5.2 | Anthropic Claude Opus 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | November 9, 2026 | September 22, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $8.00 | $4.00 |
| Output $/Mtok | $40.00 | $20.00 |
| Coding index | 87.8 | 87.3 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 4 | 5 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Fable 5.2 better than Claude Opus 5.5 for coding?
Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Opus 5.5 are level for coding, 87.8 against 87.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, so price and context decide. Pick Claude Opus 5.5 for output tokens 2.0x cheaper ($20.00 vs $40.00 per million) and work measured by LiveBench coding or SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI), where it leads. Pick Claude Fable 5.2 for work measured by LMArena WebDev or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.2 or Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude Fable 5.2 costs $8.00 per million input tokens and $40.00 per million output tokens; Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00 and $20.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Fable 5.2 or Claude Opus 5.5?
Neither: both take 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Opus 5.5 comparison based on?
67 benchmarks have a result for both models as of November 14, 2026. Claude Fable 5.2's coding index rests on 4 independent benchmarks and Claude Opus 5.5's on 5. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.