Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs Gemini 2.5 Pro
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Gemini 2.5 Pro by Google? 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 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… scores 37.1 points higher (53.2 vs 16.1) but costs 11× as much to run the benchmark ($9063 vs $823; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… when you need intelligence above 16.1, and Gemini 2.5 Pro when 16.1 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | Gemini 2.5 Pro | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.2 | 16.1 | −69.7% Gemini 2.5 Pro is 69.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $9,063.11 | $822.85 | −90.9% Gemini 2.5 Pro is 90.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 86.63s | 30.16s | −65.2% Gemini 2.5 Pro is 65.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $1.25 / $10.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback): 69.7% less intelligence, 90.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 65.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 57.60 for $8708.
- Gemini 2.5 Pro is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback)Gemini 2.5 ProToday'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-xhigh/gemini-2-5-pro · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-xhigh/gemini-2-5-pro?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill