Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) vs Inkling Small
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Inkling Small by Thinking Machines? 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 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… scores 49.3 points higher (62.2 vs 12.9) but costs 52× as much to run the benchmark ($11742 vs $225; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallba… when you need intelligence above 12.9, and Inkling Small when 12.9 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) | Inkling Small | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 62.2 | 12.9 | −79.3% Inkling Small is 79.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $11,741.62 | $224.77 | −98.1% Inkling Small is 98.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 102.03s | 27.73s | −72.8% Inkling Small is 72.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech |
Inkling Small vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback): 79.3% less intelligence, 98.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 72.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Inkling Small is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Terra (Medium) scores 38.20 for $190.
Claude Fable 5.2 (Xhigh, Default Fallback)Inkling SmallToday'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-xhigh/inkling-small · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-xhigh/inkling-small?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill