Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) vs GLM-5.2 (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) by Anthropic or GLM-5.2 (Max) by Z AI? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) scores 15.9 points higher (49.6 vs 33.7) but costs 5.3× as much to run the benchmark ($11161 vs $2097; both flagship class). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) when you need intelligence above 33.7, and GLM-5.2 (Max) when 33.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) | GLM-5.2 (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 49.6 | 33.7 | −32.1% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 32.1% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $11,160.86 | $2,097.29 | −81.2% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 81.2% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 85.37s | 29.78s | −65.1% GLM-5.2 (Max) is 65.1% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $1.40 / $4.40 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text |
GLM-5.2 (Max) vs Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback): 32.1% less intelligence, 81.2% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 65.1% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 57.60 for $8708.
- GLM-5.2 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback)GLM-5.2 (Max)Today'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/glm-5-2 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5/glm-5-2?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill