Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic? 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 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… scores 8.3 points higher (62.2 vs 53.9) but costs 4.1× as much to run the benchmark ($11742 vs $2862; both flagship class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… when you need intelligence above 53.9, and Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) when 53.9 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) | Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.9 | 62.2 | +15.4% Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhi… is 15.4% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,861.78 | $11,741.62 | +310.3% Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhi… is 4.1× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 21.73s | 102.03s | +369.5% Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhi… is 369.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $8.00 / $40.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback): 15.4% more intelligence, 310.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 369.5% slower end-to-end.
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 54.60 for $1124.
- Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Compare something else
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-low/claude-fable-5-2-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-low/claude-fable-5-2-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill