Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) vs Inkling Small
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) by Anthropic or Inkling Small by Thinking Machines? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) scores 23.9 points higher (49.6 vs 25.7) but costs 46× as much to run the benchmark ($11161 vs $241; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) when you need intelligence above 25.7, and Inkling Small when 25.7 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback) | Inkling Small | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 49.6 | 25.7 | −48.2% Inkling Small is 48.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $11,160.86 | $240.85 | −97.8% Inkling Small is 97.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 77.70s | 12.68s | −83.7% Inkling Small is 83.7% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $10.0 / $50.0 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech |
Inkling Small vs Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 Fallback): 48.2% less intelligence, 97.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 83.7% 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.
- Inkling Small is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.6-Pro scores 46.30 for $207.
Claude Fable 5 (Max, Opus 4.8 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/inkling-small · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5/inkling-small?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill