Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash

Model Markets Rankings

Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency

All rankings →
RankingClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.7 Flash
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v1.2UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort#3 of 2287.8 score
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 36-model eligible cohort#15 of 36$0.085 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.0UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort#2 of 2268.1 score

Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.7 Flash
ARC-AGI-1verified-v1-2aa739d957fc · verified_score · leader97.50100% of row best · percent · Claude Fable 5.1 (Max)95.5098% of row best · percent · Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
ARC-AGI-2verified-v2-b5cb5ec6e8c7 · verified_score · leader90.00100% of row best · percent · Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)84.5894% of row best · percent · Gemini 3.7 Flash (High)
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above2 benchmark winsOverall lead0 benchmark wins

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

FieldAt a Glance
Anthropic · activeClaude Fable 5.1Verified Sep 2, 2026
Google DeepMind · activeGemini 3.7 FlashVerified Aug 29, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.7 Flash
DeveloperAnthropicGoogle DeepMind
FamilyClaude 5 1Gemini 3
ModelClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.7 Flash
VersionClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.7 Flash
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-09-01Unknown
Knowledge cutoff2026-06-01Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Video, Audio, Document
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,000K1,049K
Total parametersUnknownUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownUnknown
Open weightsNoNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoNo
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard)Google AI (Standard), Google Gemini (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

13 comparable fields · 7 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Claude Fable 5.1 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Input price$10.00
Output price$50.00
Serving providers1
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-fable-5-1

Gemini 3.7 Flash Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Input price$0.75
Output price$3.75
Serving providers2
Canonical IDgoogle-deepmind/gemini-3.7-flash

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All text comparisons →
APairBContext
vsfamily variantsimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash FAQs

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3.7 Flash better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemini 3.7 Flash, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3.7 Flash?+

Claude Fable 5.1 is $10.00 and Gemini 3.7 Flash is $0.75 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric. Claude Fable 5.1 is $50.00 and Gemini 3.7 Flash is $3.75 per million tokens, so Gemini 3.7 Flash is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3.7 Flash?+

Gemini 3.7 Flash has the larger sourced context window. Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1,000K and Gemini 3.7 Flash supports 1,049K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3.7 Flash?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.

Can Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3.7 Flash be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Fable 5.1 is not marked open weight; Gemini 3.7 Flash is not marked open weight.

Can Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemini 3.7 Flash understand images?+

Claude Fable 5.1 is documented with image input; Gemini 3.7 Flash is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3.7 Flash?+

Claude Fable 5.1 has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Fable 5.1 supports 128K and Gemini 3.7 Flash supports 66K output tokens.

Do Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemini 3.7 Flash support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Fable 5.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Gemini 3.7 Flash: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3.7 Flash?+

Claude Fable 5.1 has 1 sourced provider route; Gemini 3.7 Flash has 2, so Gemini 3.7 Flash has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3.7 Flash?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback