Apodex 1.1 vs Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback)
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) by Anthropic? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) scores 23.2 points higher (49.6 vs 26.4) but costs 12× as much to run the benchmark ($11161 vs $939; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) when you need intelligence above 26.4, and Apodex 1.1 when 26.4 is enough.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 49.6 | +87.9% Claude Fable 5 (Max, … is 87.9% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $11,160.86 | +1088.5% Claude Fable 5 (Max, … is 12× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 85.62s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $3.00 | $10.0 / $50.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) vs Apodex 1.1: 87.9% more intelligence, 1088.5% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Apodex 1.1 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 57.60 for $8708.
Apodex 1.1Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/claude-fable-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/claude-fable-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill