Claude Fable 5.2 vs Qwen3.7 Max
Claude Fable 5.2 leads Qwen3.7 Max on coding, 87.8 to 54.1 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Qwen3.7 Max costs 9.0x less per output token ($4.425 vs $40.00 per million). Updated November 14, 2026; 34 benchmarks have a result for both.
Claude Fable 5.2 or Qwen3.7 Max: which to pick
Pick Claude Fable 5.2 for coding: it scores 87.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 54.1 for Qwen3.7 Max.
Pick Qwen3.7 Max for output tokens 9.0x cheaper ($4.425 vs $40.00 per million).
- Shared results
- 34
- Claude Fable 5.2 only
- 34
- Qwen3.7 Max only
- 29
- 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
Claude Fable 5.2
Claude Fable 5.2 scores 87.8 against 54.1.
4 and 3 benchmarks behind the scores
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
No call
Only Claude Fable 5.2 has a AA Intelligence Index result, 64.6.
Directional only
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Max has a AA Agentic Index result, 22.5.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Max has a GPQA Diamond result, 90.2%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Max has a MMLU Pro result, 89.3%.
Directional only
Web design
Design Arena: websites
Claude Fable 5.2
Claude Fable 5.2 leads, 1351 against 1267.
Same board, both measured
General
Vals Index
No call
Only Claude Fable 5.2 has a Vals Index result, 71.3%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
No call
Both take 1M tokens.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Qwen3.7 Max
Claude Fable 5.2 $0.028, Qwen3.7 Max $0.0037 per turn.
List prices
Cost per solved task
One SWE-bench Verified task, solved
No call
Only Qwen3.7 Max has the number, $4.69.
Directional only
At a glance
- Coding index
- Claude Fable 5.2 87.8 from 4 benchmarks, Qwen3.7 Max 54.1 from 3 benchmarks.
- Widest category
- Math, 43.6 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
- Widest single gap
- EBR-bench: Claude Fable 5.2 90.5% against Qwen3.7 Max 9.5%, 81.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Claude Fable 5.2 $40.00 against Qwen3.7 Max $4.425 per million output tokens, 9.0x 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 | Qwen3.7 Max | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | 8 | 0 | ||
| Intelligence | 1 | 0 | ||
| Agentic work | 5 | 0 | ||
| Reasoning | 6 | 0 | ||
| Math | 4 | 0 | ||
| Knowledge | 1 | 0 | ||
| Web design | 5 | 0 | ||
| General | 4 | 0 | ||
| All shared boards | 34 | 0 |
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index80
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench coding | 79.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| LMArena WebDev | 1838 | 1515 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 66.0 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 87.1% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI) | Not measured | 68.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI) | 65.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI) | 93.8% | 47.7% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Code migration (Vals AI) | Not measured | 13.1% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| ProgramBench (Vals AI) | 19.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI) | Not measured | 61.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI) | 62.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| SciCode | 67.7% | 49.5% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 50.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Artificial Analysis run) | 61.6% | 1.5% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| FrontierCode 2.0 | 49.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| FrontierSWE | 69.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| ALE-Bench | 2509.8 | 1189.4 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMArena WebDev: React | 1915 | 1512 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMArena WebDev: HTML | 1738 | 1514 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| GameBench 2 | 99.1 | 39.3 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| CursorBench 4.0 | 60.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 64.6 | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 173.4 | 154.5 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 22.5 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building web apps | Not measured | 1184 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps | 1402 | 1166 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: agents building mobile apps | 1325 | 1149 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: agents building Android apps | Not measured | 1148 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building Godot games | Not measured | 1166 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: agents building games | Not measured | 1101 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: HTML slides | Not measured | 1053 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: PowerPoint slides | Not measured | 1153 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: spreadsheets | 1434 | 999 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LiveBench research | 94.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| LiveBench browser | 86.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| LiveBench long agentic | 82.9% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Finance Agent (Vals AI) | Not measured | 47.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI) | 32.1% | 15.8% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Legal Research Bench (Vals AI) | 46.1% | 25.5% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI) | 5.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI) | Not measured | 57.0% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| BioMysteryBench (Vals AI) | 83.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI) | 55.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Vals Science Index | 63.7% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | Not measured | 94.7% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| APEX-Agents | 80.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Remote Labor Index | 41.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| SpireClimb | 15.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here | |||
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index60
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | Not measured | 90.2% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LiveBench reasoning | 88.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| MysteryMechanism (Vals AI) | 51.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | Not measured | 92.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 74.3% | 40.5% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| HLE-Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 80.2% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| CritPt v2, hard subset (Artificial Analysis run) | 76.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run) | 93.9% | 90.9% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| ARC-AGI | 98.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 93.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| SimpleBench | 94.9% | 70.4% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Chess puzzles | 79.0% | 27.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Mystery game puzzles | 90.0% | 32.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| EBR-bench | 90.5% | 9.5% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Scale run) | 72.4% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| GoBench | 2566 | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME | 99.7% | 95.6% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 3 | 95.1% | 64.6% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| FrontierMath, tier 4 | 100.0% | 34.1% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| ProofBench | 100.0% | 26.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| MathArena | 82.8% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | Not measured | 89.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | Not measured | 84.9% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | Not measured | 63.7% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | Not measured | 75.3% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | Not measured | 38.8% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| AA-Omniscience | 66.8 | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 94.0% | 55.8% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| PRBench Finance | 47.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| PRBench Legal | 49.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 12 boards here | |||
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index50
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: websites | 1351 | 1267 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: UI components | 1371 | 1263 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: game dev | 1396 | 1254 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: data viz | Not measured | 1273 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: 3D | 1517 | 1245 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: all code categories | 1373 | 1265 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Design Arena: SVG | Not measured | 1206 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Design Arena: ASCII art | Not measured | 1204 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| LiveBench design | 85.1% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 71.3% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| LiveBench data analysis | 81.5% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | Not measured | 79.4% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| IFBench | Not measured | 80.5% | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 83.3% | 79.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| GDPval-AA | 1831 | 1134 | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| DTBench | 99.2% | 92.3% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| LMCA | 70.6% | 44.0% | Claude Fable 5.2 |
| Furniture assembly | 90.0% | Not measured | Only Claude Fable 5.2 measured |
| EQ-Bench 4 | Not measured | 1100 | Only Qwen3.7 Max measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 39 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.2 | Qwen3.7 Max | 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
Qwen3.7 Max costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Qwen3.7 Max costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Qwen3.7 Max 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 | Qwen3.7 Max |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Anthropic | Qwen |
| Weights | No public weights listed | No public weights listed |
| Released | November 9, 2026 | May 21, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| Input $/Mtok | $8.00 | $1.475 |
| Output $/Mtok | $40.00 | $4.425 |
| Coding index | 87.8 | 54.1 |
| Independent measurements behind it | 4 | 3 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | $4.69 |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Claude Fable 5.2 better than Qwen3.7 Max for coding?
Pick Claude Fable 5.2 for coding: it scores 87.8 on the Vibe Coding Index against 54.1 for Qwen3.7 Max. Pick Qwen3.7 Max for output tokens 9.0x cheaper ($4.425 vs $40.00 per million).
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.2 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Claude Fable 5.2 costs $8.00 per million input tokens and $40.00 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Max costs $1.475 and $4.425. Cost per solved task is known for Qwen3.7 Max only.
Which has the bigger context window, Claude Fable 5.2 or Qwen3.7 Max?
Neither: both take 1M tokens.
How many benchmarks is the Claude Fable 5.2 vs Qwen3.7 Max comparison based on?
34 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 Qwen3.7 Max's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.