Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) vs Mistral Medium 3.5
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Mistral Medium 3.5 by Mistral? 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 49.3 points higher (53.9 vs 4.6) but costs 2.6× as much to run the benchmark ($2862 vs $1103; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Mistral Medium 3.5.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) | Mistral Medium 3.5 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.9 | 4.6 | −91.5% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 91.5% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,861.78 | $1,103.02 | −61.5% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 61.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 24.94s | 17.23s | −30.9% Mistral Medium 3.5 is 30.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $1.50 / $7.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Mistral Medium 3.5 vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback): 91.5% less intelligence, 61.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 30.9% 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.
- Mistral Medium 3.5 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 52.50 for $718.
Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback)Mistral Medium 3.5Today'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-low/mistral-medium-3-5 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-low/mistral-medium-3-5?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill