Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.8 Max
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.8 Max 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 13.2 points higher (53.4 vs 40.2) but costs 4.1× as much to run the benchmark ($13129 vs $3172; both flagship class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 40.2, and Qwen3.8 Max when 40.2 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.8 Max | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.4 | 40.2 | −24.7% Qwen3.8 Max is 24.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $13,128.86 | $3,172.37 | −75.8% Qwen3.8 Max is 75.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 224.26s | 61.90s | −72.4% Qwen3.8 Max is 72.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 Max vs Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback): 24.7% less intelligence, 75.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 72.4% 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 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Max, Default Fallback)Qwen3.8 MaxToday'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-0803 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-1/qwen3-8-max-0803?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill