Claude Fable 5.1 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16

At a Glance

Compare
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#1 of 4699.0 score · 3/3 sources · completeUnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#43 of 44$0.824 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#22 of 3851.7 score · 3/3 sources · completeUnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$10.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026$0.050Openrouter · Aug 29, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$50.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026$0.20Openrouter · Aug 29, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,000K262K
Model facts checkedSep 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

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkClaude Fable 5.1NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-30B-A3B-BF16
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,507.58100% of row best · rating · claude-fable-5.1-max; 95% CI [1499.42882565, 1515.73467375]; votes 5783; rank 11,348.4489% of row best · rating · nvidia-nemotron-3-nano-30b-a3b-bf16; 95% CI [1342.98546755, 1353.88978012]; votes 15325; rank 195
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above1 benchmark winNo overall winner0 benchmark winsNo overall winner

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

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldClaude Fable 5.1NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-30B-A3B-BF16
DeveloperAnthropicNVIDIA
FamilyClaude 5 1Nvidia Nemotron 3 Nano 30b A3b Bf16
ModelClaude Fable 5.1NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-30B-A3B-BF16
VersionClaude Fable 5.1NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-30B-A3B-BF16
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-09-012025-12-15
Knowledge cutoff2026-06-012025-11-28
Input modalitiesText, ImageText
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,000K262K
Total parametersUnknown31.6B
Active parametersUnknown3.5B
LicenseUnknownother
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard)Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, generation, reasoning, tools

Claude Fable 5.1 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers1
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-fable-5-1

NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers3
Canonical IDnvidia/NVIDIA-Nemotron-3-Nano-30B-A3B-BF16

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Claude Fable 5.1 vs NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 FAQs

Is Claude Fable 5.1 or NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Fable 5.1 and NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16?+

Claude Fable 5.1 is $10.00 and NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 is $0.050 per million tokens, so NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 is cheaper on this metric. Claude Fable 5.1 is $50.00 and NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 is $0.20 per million tokens, so NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16?+

Claude Fable 5.1 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Fable 5.1 supports 1,000K and NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 supports 262K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Fable 5.1 or NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16?+

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 NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 be self-hosted?+

NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Fable 5.1 is not marked open weight; NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 is open weight.

Can Claude Fable 5.1 and NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 understand images?+

Claude Fable 5.1 is documented with image input; NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Claude Fable 5.1 or NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16?+

NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 has the larger sourced maximum output: Claude Fable 5.1 supports 128K and NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 supports 1,049K output tokens.

Do Claude Fable 5.1 and NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Fable 5.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Fable 5.1 or NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16?+

Claude Fable 5.1 has 1 sourced provider route; NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 has 3, so NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16 has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Fable 5.1 or NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B BF16?+

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