Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) vs Grok 4.7 (Low)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Grok 4.7 (Low) by SpaceXAI? 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 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 22.8 points higher (53.9 vs 31.1) but costs 1.3× as much to run the benchmark ($2862 vs $2169; both flagship class). Pick Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Grok 4.7 (Low).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) | Grok 4.7 (Low) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.9 | 31.1 | −42.3% Grok 4.7 (Low) is 42.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,861.78 | $2,168.65 | −24.2% Grok 4.7 (Low) is 24.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 22.57s | 15.94s | −29.4% Grok 4.7 (Low) is 29.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Grok 4.7 (Low) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback): 42.3% less intelligence, 24.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 29.4% faster 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.
- Grok 4.7 (Low) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 54.60 for $1124.
Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback)Grok 4.7 (Low)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/grok-4-7-low · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-low/grok-4-7-low?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill