Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning) 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 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 26.4 points higher (46.8 vs 20.4) but costs 7.0× as much to run the benchmark ($3158 vs $451; 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 20.4, and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning) when 20.4 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.8 | 20.4 | −56.4% DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 … is 56.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,157.66 | $450.76 | −85.7% DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 … is 85.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.92s | 6.58s | −39.7% DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 … is 39.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $1.32 / $3.96 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback): 56.4% less intelligence, 85.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 39.7% 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 Pro 0813 (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
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-pro-non-reasoning · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-low/deepseek-v4-pro-non-reasoning?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill