Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) vs GLM-5.3-Flash
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GLM-5.3-Flash by Z AI? 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 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 11.6 points higher (53.4 vs 41.8) but costs 43× as much to run the benchmark ($13129 vs $306; 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 41.8, and GLM-5.3-Flash when 41.8 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) | GLM-5.3-Flash | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.4 | 41.8 | −21.7% GLM-5.3-Flash is 21.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $13,128.86 | $305.52 | −97.7% GLM-5.3-Flash is 97.7% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 224.30s | 37.69s | −83.2% GLM-5.3-Flash is 83.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.15 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
GLM-5.3-Flash vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback): 21.7% less intelligence, 97.7% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 83.2% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
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.
- GLM-5.3-Flash is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback)GLM-5.3-FlashToday'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/glm-5-3-flash · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1/glm-5-3-flash?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill