Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 (Max) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallbac… scores 20.8 points higher (51.2 vs 30.4) but costs 19× as much to run the benchmark ($5242 vs $277; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallbac… when you need intelligence above 30.4, and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 (Max) when 30.4 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 51.2 | 30.4 | −40.6% DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 … is 40.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,241.59 | $277.30 | −94.7% DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 … is 94.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.41s | 48.21s | +69.7% DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 … is 69.7% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.43 / $0.87 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 (Max) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback): 40.6% less intelligence, 94.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 69.7% slower end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- DeepSeek V4 Pro 0424 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-high/deepseek-v4-pro-0424 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-high/deepseek-v4-pro-0424?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill