Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) vs GPT-6 Luna (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GPT-6 Luna (Max) by OpenAI? 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 8.7 points higher (46.8 vs 38.1) but costs 26× as much to run the benchmark ($3158 vs $122; 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 38.1, and GPT-6 Luna (Max) when 38.1 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback) | GPT-6 Luna (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 46.8 | 38.1 | −18.6% GPT-6 Luna (Max) is 18.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,157.66 | $122.05 | −96.1% GPT-6 Luna (Max) is 96.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.25s | 97.63s | +767.8% GPT-6 Luna (Max) is 767.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.10 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-6 Luna (Max) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback): 18.6% less intelligence, 96.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 767.8% 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 Luna (Max) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Low, Default Fallback)GPT-6 Luna (Max)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-luna · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-low/gpt-6-luna?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill