Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) vs Muse Ember (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Muse Ember (Max) by Meta? 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 17.9 points higher (53.9 vs 36.0) but costs 24× as much to run the benchmark ($2862 vs $117; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 36.0, and Muse Ember (Max) when 36.0 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) | Muse Ember (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.9 | 36.0 | −33.2% Muse Ember (Max) is 33.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,861.78 | $117.12 | −95.9% Muse Ember (Max) is 95.9% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 24.94s | 10.09s | −59.5% Muse Ember (Max) is 59.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $0.10 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Ember (Max) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback): 33.2% less intelligence, 95.9% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 59.5% 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.
- Muse Ember (Max) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback)Muse Ember (Max)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/muse-ember · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-low/muse-ember?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill