Claude Fable 5.2 (Max, Default Fallback) vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (Max, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Qwen3.8 Max (0902) by Alibaba? 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 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 30.9 points higher (64.6 vs 33.7) but costs 3.5× as much to run the benchmark ($22191 vs $6354; both flagship class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5.2 (Max, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 33.7, and Qwen3.8 Max (0902) when 33.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (Max, Default Fallback) | Qwen3.8 Max (0902) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 64.6 | 33.7 | −47.8% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 47.8% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $22,191.42 | $6,353.83 | −71.4% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 71.4% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 258.66s | 65.35s | −74.7% Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is 74.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Qwen3.8 Max (0902) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (Max, Default Fallback): 47.8% less intelligence, 71.4% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 74.7% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.2 (Max, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Qwen3.8 Max (0902) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Gemini 4 Carbon (Medium) scores 58.30 for $5903.
Claude Fable 5.2 (Max, Default Fallback)Qwen3.8 Max (0902)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/qwen3-8-max · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2/qwen3-8-max?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill