Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) vs Grok 4.7 (High)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Grok 4.7 (High) by SpaceXAI? 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 (High, Default Fallbac… scores 4.9 points higher (51.2 vs 46.3) but costs 1.4× as much to run the benchmark ($5242 vs $3881; both flagship class). Pick Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallbac… when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Grok 4.7 (High).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) | Grok 4.7 (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 51.2 | 46.3 | −9.6% Grok 4.7 (High) is 9.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,241.59 | $3,880.88 | −26.0% Grok 4.7 (High) is 26.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.58s | 42.17s | +47.6% Grok 4.7 (High) is 47.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Grok 4.7 (High) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback): 9.6% less intelligence, 26.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 47.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
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.
- Grok 4.7 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback)Grok 4.7 (High)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/claude-fable-5-1-high/grok-4-7-high · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-high/grok-4-7-high?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill