Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback) vs Inkling Small
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Inkling Small by Thinking Machines? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallb… scores 23.2 points higher (48.9 vs 25.7) but costs 17× as much to run the benchmark ($3983 vs $241; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallb… when you need intelligence above 25.7, and Inkling Small when 25.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback) | Inkling Small | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 48.9 | 25.7 | −47.4% Inkling Small is 47.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,983.28 | $240.85 | −94.0% Inkling Small is 94.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 14.35s | 12.95s | −9.8% Inkling Small is 9.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech |
Inkling Small vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback): 47.4% less intelligence, 94.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 9.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
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.
- Inkling Small is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Medium, Default Fallback)Inkling SmallToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights 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-medium/inkling-small · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-medium/inkling-small?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill