Claude Fable 5.1 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Meta |
| Family | Claude 5 1 | Llama 4 Maverick 17b 128e Instruct |
| Model | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
| Version | Claude Fable 5.1 | Llama-4-Maverick-17B-128E-Instruct |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-09-01 | 2025-04-05 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-06-01 | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 1,000K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 401.6B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 17B |
| License | Unknown | other |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Standard) | Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, tools |
14 comparable fields · 9 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate
Claude Fable 5.1 Capabilities
Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct Capabilities
Internal Comparison Graph
Related Comparisons
| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Claude Fable 5Anthropic | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | family variantsimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct FAQs
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Claude Fable 5.1 is $10.00 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is $0.20 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is cheaper on this metric. Claude Fable 5.1 is $50.00 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is $0.696 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Claude Fable 5.1 is 1,000K and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is 1,000K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct be self-hosted?+
Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Fable 5.1 is not marked open weight; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is open weight.
Can Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct understand images?+
Claude Fable 5.1 is documented with image input; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Fable 5.1 is 128K and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct is —.
Do Claude Fable 5.1 and Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Fable 5.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct: tool calling and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
Claude Fable 5.1 has 1 sourced provider route; Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct has 1, a tie.
Which offers better value, Claude Fable 5.1 or Llama 4 Maverick 17B 128E Instruct?+
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.