Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) vs GLM-5.3 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or GLM-5.3 (Max) by Z AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-10.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallbac… scores 30.1 points higher (61.8 vs 31.7) but costs 2.0× as much to run the benchmark ($7106 vs $3496; both flagship class). Pick Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallbac… when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GLM-5.3 (Max).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) | GLM-5.3 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 61.8 | 31.7 | −48.7% GLM-5.3 (Max) is 48.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $7,105.77 | $3,495.62 | −50.8% GLM-5.3 (Max) is 50.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 35.25s | 29.27s | −17.0% GLM-5.3 (Max) is 17.0% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $1.40 / $4.40 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
GLM-5.3 (Max) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback): 48.7% less intelligence, 50.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 17.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- GLM-5.3 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Fable 5.2 (Medium, Default Fallback) scores 56.40 for $3360.
Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback)GLM-5.3 (Max)Today'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-5-2-high/glm-5-3 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-high/glm-5-3?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill