Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) by DeepSeek? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 8.3 points higher (53.4 vs 45.1) but costs 30× as much to run the benchmark ($13129 vs $445; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 45.1, and DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) when 45.1 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) | DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.4 | 45.1 | −15.5% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 15.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $13,128.86 | $444.60 | −96.6% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 96.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 201.58s | 16.13s | −92.0% DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1… is 92.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback): 15.5% less intelligence, 96.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 92.0% faster end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 57.60 for $8708.
- DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1/deepseek-v4-1-flash-1017?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill