Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.8 Max (0902) by Alibaba? 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 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 8.0 points higher (53.4 vs 45.4) but costs 2.7× as much to run the benchmark ($13129 vs $4935; both flagship class). Pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 Max (0902).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.8 Max (0902) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.4 | 45.4 | −15.0% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 15.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $13,128.86 | $4,934.79 | −62.4% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 62.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 201.58s | 64.07s | −68.2% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 68.2% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback): 15.0% less intelligence, 62.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 68.2% 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.
- Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback)Qwen3.8 Max (0902)Today'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/qwen3-8-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1/qwen3-8-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill