Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.7
Benchmark Performance
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| ARC-AGI-1verified-v1-15fb467fd4fc · verified_score · leader | 98.50100% of row best · percent · Claude Fable 5 (XHigh) | 93.5095% of row best · percent · Claude 4.7 (High) |
| ARC-AGI-2verified-v2-9a3db289984e · verified_score · leader | 89.17100% of row best · percent · Claude Fable 5 (Max) | 75.8385% of row best · percent · Claude 4.7 (Max) |
| LMArena Agent Arenaagent-2026-08-31-011508720696 · outcome_score · leader | 10.58100% of row best · score · Claude Fable 5 (High); 95% CI [9.03695952, 12.11501267]; sessions 34905; observations 1709479; rank 3 | 6.3396% of row best · score · Claude Opus 4.7; 95% CI [4.91001873, 7.74575053]; sessions 37121; observations 1470793; rank 10 |
| LMArena Document Arenadocument-2026-07-30-011508720696 · arena_rating · statistical tie | 1,504.25100% of row best · rating · claude-fable-5; 95% CI [1495.07964874, 1513.41865883]; votes 5792; rank 4 | 1,497.02100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7-thinking; 95% CI [1489.90818265, 1504.13387209]; votes 18793; rank 6 |
| LMArena Search Arenasearch-2026-08-24-011508720696 · arena_rating · statistical tie | 1,230.22100% of row best · rating · claude-fable-5; 95% CI [1222.30895335, 1238.13609545]; votes 41795; rank 5 | 1,233.25100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7; 95% CI [1227.87374811, 1238.63530622]; votes 91394; rank 4 |
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader | 1,494.40100% of row best · rating · claude-fable-5; 95% CI [1489.42750707, 1499.38052801]; votes 26977; rank 5 | 1,483.2199% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7; 95% CI [1479.33960820, 1487.07067536]; votes 61256; rank 10 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-08-27-011508720696 · arena_rating · statistical tie | 1,329.46100% of row best · rating · claude-fable-5; 95% CI [1321.03632319, 1337.88661881]; votes 10002; rank 1 | 1,316.4099% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7-high; 95% CI [1309.56408453, 1323.22870707]; votes 21137; rank 4 |
| LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader | 86.55100% of row best · percent · claude-fable-5-max-effort · 20,255 output tokens / case | 80.9794% of row best · percent · claude-opus-4-7-xhigh-effort · 11,460 output tokens / case |
| ToneBench2026-08-28-10-task-cd9819ab6e4d · overall_score · leader | 89.06100% of row best · points · Claude Fable 5 (xhigh) · 2,862 output tokens / case | 85.4996% of row best · points · Claude Opus 4.7 · 2,578 output tokens / case |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above · 3 ties | 6 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.
Technical Differences
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Anthropic | Anthropic |
| Family | Claude 5 | Claude 4 |
| Model | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Version | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Opus 4.7 |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-06-09 | 2026-04-16 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | 2026-01-01 |
| Input modalities | Unknown | Unknown |
| Output modalities | Unknown | Unknown |
| Context window | 1,000,000 | 1,000,000 |
| Total parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | Unknown |
| Open weights | No | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | No |
| Provider access | Anthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) | Anthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
12 comparable fields · 6 material differences · Interactive comparison only; indexing gate not met
Claude Fable 5 Capabilities
Claude Opus 4.7 Capabilities
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 4.7 FAQs
Is Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.7 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 4.7, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.7?+
Claude Fable 5 is $10.00 and Claude Opus 4.7 is $5.00 per million tokens, so Claude Opus 4.7 is cheaper on this metric. Claude Fable 5 is $50.00 and Claude Opus 4.7 is $25.00 per million tokens, so Claude Opus 4.7 is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.7?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Claude Fable 5 is 1,000,000 and Claude Opus 4.7 is 1,000,000.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.7?+
Claude Fable 5 leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 9 protocol-matched benchmarks from 4 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.
Can Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.7 be self-hosted?+
Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: unsupported. Claude Fable 5 is not marked open weight; Claude Opus 4.7 is not marked open weight.
Can Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 4.7 understand images?+
Claude Fable 5 is not documented with image input; Claude Opus 4.7 is not documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.7?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Fable 5 is 128,000 and Claude Opus 4.7 is 128,000.
Do Claude Fable 5 and Claude Opus 4.7 support reasoning and tool use?+
Claude Fable 5: reasoning and tool calling. Claude Opus 4.7: reasoning and tool calling. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.7?+
Claude Fable 5 has 3 sourced provider routes; Claude Opus 4.7 has 2, so Claude Fable 5 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Claude Fable 5 or Claude Opus 4.7?+
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.