Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.2

Model Markets Rankings

Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency

All rankings →
RankingClaude Fable 5.1GPT-5.2
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v1.2UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort#18 of 2249.3 score
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 36-model eligible cohort#23 of 36$0.161 per LiveBench case
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.0UnrankedNot in the 22-model eligible cohort#19 of 2242.6 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 5.1GPT-5.2
ARC-AGI-1verified-v1-2aa739d957fc · verified_score · leader97.50100% of row best · percent · Claude Fable 5.1 (Max)86.1788% of row best · percent · GPT-5.2 (XHigh)
ARC-AGI-2verified-v2-b5cb5ec6e8c7 · verified_score · leader90.00100% of row best · percent · Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)52.9159% of row best · percent · GPT-5.2 (XHigh)
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
OpenAI · activeGPT-5.2Verified Sep 3, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldClaude Fable 5.1GPT-5.2
DeveloperAnthropicOpenAI
FamilyClaude 5 1Gpt 5 2
ModelClaude Fable 5.1GPT-5.2
VersionClaude Fable 5.1GPT-5.2
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-09-012025-12-11
Knowledge cutoff2026-06-012025-08-31
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,000K400K
Total parametersUnknownUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownUnknown
Open weightsNoNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoNo
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard)Openai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

15 comparable fields · 9 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

GPT-5.2 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price$1.75
Output price$14.00
Serving providers2
Canonical IDopenai/gpt-5.2

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All image 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 GPT-5.2 FAQs

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.2 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.2, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.2?+

Claude Fable 5.1 is $10.00 and GPT-5.2 is $1.75 per million tokens, so GPT-5.2 is cheaper on this metric. Claude Fable 5.1 is $50.00 and GPT-5.2 is $14.00 per million tokens, so GPT-5.2 is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.2?+

Claude Fable 5.1 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1,000K and GPT-5.2 supports 400K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.2?+

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 GPT-5.2 be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Fable 5.1 is not marked open weight; GPT-5.2 is not marked open weight.

Can Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.2 understand images?+

Claude Fable 5.1 is documented with image input; GPT-5.2 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.2?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Fable 5.1 is 128K and GPT-5.2 is 128K.

Do Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.2 support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Fable 5.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GPT-5.2: 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 GPT-5.2?+

Claude Fable 5.1 has 1 sourced provider route; GPT-5.2 has 2, so GPT-5.2 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.2?+

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