Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3
At a Glance
| Compare | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic |  Kimi K3Moonshot AI |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v4.4 | #2 of 5799.0 score · 3/3 sources · complete | #13 of 5773.3 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | #27 of 27$0.824 per LiveBench case | #19 of 27$0.163 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.9 | #14 of 2749.5 score · 3/3 sources · complete | #12 of 2750.1 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $10.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $0.239Openrouter ↗ · Oct 19, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $50.00Anthropic ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 | $11.936Openrouter ↗ · Oct 19, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 1,049K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 2, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5.1 | Kimi-K3 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-1verified-v1-613c385b0c93 · verified_score · leader | 97.50100% of row best · percent · Claude Fable 5.1 (Max) | 94.5097% of row best · percent · Kimi K3 (Max) |
| ARC-AGI-2verified-v2-be40992860f9 · verified_score · leader | 90.00100% of row best · percent · Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) | 60.4267% of row best · percent · Kimi K3 (Max) |
| LMArena Agent Arenaagent-2026-10-16-a64ca3b12b6e · outcome_score · leader | 14.03100% of row best · score · Claude Fable 5.1 (Max); 95% CI [12.03932907, 16.02502568]; sessions 16374; observations 1913479; rank 3 | 1.9389% of row best · score · Kimi K3 (Max); 95% CI [1.20183745, 2.66737332]; sessions 135415; observations 12343129; rank 23 |
| LiveBench2026-06-25-90f8d44da965 · overall · leader | 86.82100% of row best · percent · claude-fable-5-1-max-effort · 16,470 output tokens / case | 81.0293% of row best · percent · kimi-k3 · 13,647 output tokens / case |
| ToneBench2026-10-17-10-task-e9c76358afb2 · overall_score · unverified | 84.53100% of row best · points · Claude Fable 5.1 (max effort) · 68,653 output tokens / case | 82.2397% of row best · points · Kimi K3 (max) · 21,438 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 4 benchmark winsOverall lead | 0 benchmark wins |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Quality Versus Estimated Output Cost
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Fable 5.1 | Kimi-K3 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Moonshot AI |
| Family | Claude 5 1 | Kimi K3 |
| Model | Claude Fable 5.1 | Kimi-K3 |
| Version | Claude Fable 5.1 | Kimi-K3 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2026-07-16 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-06-01 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 1,049K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 2.78T |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 104B |
| License | Unknown | other |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Standard) | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning |
Claude Fable 5.1 Capabilities
Kimi K3 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Fable 5Anthropic | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Mythos 5.1Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Claude Opus 5Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4-Flash-Vision-ExpDeepSeek | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.7 MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 FAQs
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Kimi K3 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Fable 5.1 and Kimi K3, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or Kimi K3?+
Claude Fable 5.1 is $10.00 and Kimi K3 is $0.239 per million tokens, so Kimi K3 is cheaper on this metric. Claude Fable 5.1 is $50.00 and Kimi K3 is $11.936 per million tokens, so Kimi K3 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or Kimi K3?+
Kimi K3 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1,000,000 tokens and Kimi K3 supports 1,048,576 tokens.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Fable 5.1 or Kimi K3?+
Claude Fable 5.1 leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 4 protocol-matched benchmarks from 3 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.
Can Claude Fable 5.1 or Kimi K3 be self-hosted?+
Kimi K3 is documented as self-hostable; Claude Fable 5.1 is documented as not self-hostable. Claude Fable 5.1 is not marked open weight; Kimi K3 is open weight.
Can Claude Fable 5.1 and Kimi K3 understand images?+
Claude Fable 5.1 is documented with image input; Kimi K3 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Fable 5.1 or Kimi K3?+
Claude Fable 5.1 has a sourced maximum output of 128,000 tokens; Kimi K3's maximum output is not reported. A larger limit cannot be determined.
Do Claude Fable 5.1 and Kimi K3 support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Fable 5.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Kimi K3: reasoning and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Fable 5.1 or Kimi K3?+
Claude Fable 5.1 has 1 sourced provider route; Kimi K3 has 5, so Kimi K3 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Claude Fable 5.1 or Kimi K3?+
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.