Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V3 0324
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V3 0324 by DeepSeek? 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 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 37.1 points higher (46.8 vs 9.7) but costs 159× as much to run the benchmark ($3158 vs $19.9; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 9.7, and DeepSeek V3 0324 when 9.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V3 0324 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.8 | 9.7 | −79.3% DeepSeek V3 0324 is 79.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,157.66 | $19.87 | −99.4% DeepSeek V3 0324 is 99.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.92s | 4.35s | −60.2% DeepSeek V3 0324 is 60.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.24 / $0.90 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
DeepSeek V3 0324 vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback): 79.3% less intelligence, 99.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 60.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- DeepSeek V3 0324 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Low) scores 21.50 for $10.6.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback)DeepSeek V3 0324Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights 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-low/deepseek-v3-0324 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-low/deepseek-v3-0324?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill