Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) by OpenAI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-27.
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… scores 32.5 points higher (53.2 vs 20.7) but costs 27× as much to run the benchmark ($9063 vs $331; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… when you need intelligence above 20.7, and GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) when 20.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.2 | 20.7 | −61.1% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 61.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $9,063.11 | $331.24 | −96.3% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 96.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 104.03s | 105.70s | +1.6% GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is 1.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.20 / $1.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Xhigh, Default Fallback): 61.1% less intelligence, 96.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 1.6% slower end-to-end.
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.
- GPT-5.4 nano (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-xhigh/gpt-5-4-nano · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1-xhigh/gpt-5-4-nano?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill