Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) vs Gemini 4 Carbon (High)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Gemini 4 Carbon (High) by Google? 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
Gemini 4 Carbon (High) scores 6.1 points higher (60.0 vs 53.9) but costs 2.9× as much to run the benchmark ($8240 vs $2862; both flagship class). Pick Gemini 4 Carbon (High) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) | Gemini 4 Carbon (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.9 | 60.0 | +11.3% Gemini 4 Carbon (High) is 11.3% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,861.78 | $8,239.69 | +187.9% Gemini 4 Carbon (High) is 2.9× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 22.57s | 105.81s | +368.8% Gemini 4 Carbon (High) is 368.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Gemini 4 Carbon (High) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback): 11.3% more intelligence, 187.9% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 368.8% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
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.
- Gemini 4 Carbon (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) scores 61.80 for $7106.
Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback)Gemini 4 Carbon (High)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-5-2-low/gemini-4-carbon · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-low/gemini-4-carbon?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill