Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) vs GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) scores 5.6 points higher (52.4 vs 46.8) but costs 1.2× as much to run the benchmark ($3803 vs $3158; both flagship class). Pick GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) | GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.8 | 52.4 | +12.0% GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) is 12.0% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,157.66 | $3,802.98 | +20.4% GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) is 20.4% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 10.89s | 182.46s | +1575.5% GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) is 1575.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $10.0 / $50.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback): 12.0% more intelligence, 20.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 1575.5% slower 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.
- GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback)GPT-6 Astra (Xhigh)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-low/gpt-6-astra-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-low/gpt-6-astra-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill