Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) vs Tencent Hy4
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Tencent Hy4 by Tencent? 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 19.3 points higher (53.9 vs 34.6) but costs 2.8× as much to run the benchmark ($2862 vs $1021; flagship vs premium cost classes). Pick Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Tencent Hy4.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback) | Tencent Hy4 | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 53.9 | 34.6 | −35.8% Tencent Hy4 is 35.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $2,861.78 | $1,021.46 | −64.3% Tencent Hy4 is 64.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 24.94s | Not reported | — not comparable |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $0.83 / $2.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Tencent Hy4 vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Low, Default Fallback): 35.8% less intelligence, 64.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and end-to-end time not fully reported.
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.
- Tencent Hy4 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)Tencent Hy4Today'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/tencent-hy4 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-low/tencent-hy4?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill