Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.8 27B (Medium)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-10.
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallbac… scores 44.3 points higher (61.8 vs 17.5) but costs 4.3× as much to run the benchmark ($7106 vs $1636; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallbac… when you need intelligence above 17.5, and Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) when 17.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 61.8 | 17.5 | −71.7% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 71.7% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $7,105.77 | $1,636.35 | −77.0% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 77.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 36.05s | 58.40s | +62.0% Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is 62.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $0.50 / $3.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Video |
Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback): 71.7% less intelligence, 77.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 62.0% slower end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Qwen3.8 27B (Medium) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 54.60 for $1124.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-high/qwen3-8-27b-medium · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-high/qwen3-8-27b-medium?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill