Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallb… scores 14.1 points higher (48.9 vs 34.8) but costs 3.7× as much to run the benchmark ($3983 vs $1081; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallb… when you need intelligence above 34.8, and DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) when 34.8 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 48.9 | 34.8 | −28.8% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vis… is 28.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,983.28 | $1,081.42 | −72.9% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vis… is 72.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 16.18s | 16.08s | −0.6% DeepSeek V4 Flash Vis… is 0.6% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.44 / $1.32 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback): 28.8% less intelligence, 72.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 0.6% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- DeepSeek V4 Flash Vision (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-medium/deepseek-v4-flash-vision · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-medium/deepseek-v4-flash-vision?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill