Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 22.1 points higher (46.8 vs 24.7) but costs 14× as much to run the benchmark ($3158 vs $227; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 24.7, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) when 24.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.8 | 24.7 | −47.2% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 47.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,157.66 | $227.10 | −92.8% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 92.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.89s | 2.95s | −72.9% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (… is 72.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback): 47.2% less intelligence, 92.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 72.9% faster end-to-end.
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 V4.1 Flash (Non-reasoning) 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-low/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-low/deepseek-v4-1-flash-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill