Apodex 1.1 vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback)
Which is better for the money: Apodex 1.1 by Apodex or Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… scores 26.8 points higher (53.2 vs 26.4) but costs 9.7× as much to run the benchmark ($9063 vs $939; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… when you need intelligence above 26.4, and Apodex 1.1 when 26.4 is enough.
| Metric | Apodex 1.1 | Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 26.4 | 53.2 | +101.5% Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhi… is 2.0× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $939.06 | $9,063.11 | +865.1% Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhi… is 9.7× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | Not reported | 108.69s | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.30 / $3.00 | $10.0 / $50.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs Apodex 1.1: 101.5% more intelligence, 865.1% 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 5.1 (Xhigh, Default 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 5.1 (Xhigh, Default 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-5-1-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/apodex-1-1/claude-fable-5-1-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill