Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.8 Max (0902) by Alibaba? 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 5.8 points higher (51.2 vs 45.4) but costs 1.1× as much to run the benchmark ($5242 vs $4935; both flagship class). Pick Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallbac… when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 Max (0902).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.8 Max (0902) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 51.2 | 45.4 | −11.3% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 11.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,241.59 | $4,934.79 | −5.9% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 5.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 28.58s | 64.07s | +124.2% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 124.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback): 11.3% less intelligence, 5.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 124.2% 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.
- Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Claude Fable 5.1 (High, Default Fallback)Qwen3.8 Max (0902)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/qwen3-8-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-high/qwen3-8-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill