Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Cyber
Claude Fable 5.1 comes out ahead, 36 to 30 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
AnthropicClaude Fable 5.1
36/100- ECI164.8
- Price$10.00 / $50.00
- Context1M
OpenAIGPT-5.6 Cyber
30/100- ECI—
- Price$12.50 / $75.00
- Context400K
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Claude Fable 5.1 is our pick
Claude Fable 5.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 36/100 against GPT-5.6 Cyber (30). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceClaude Fable 5.1Claude Fable 5.1 $20.00 · GPT-5.6 Cyber $28.13 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextClaude Fable 5.1Claude Fable 5.1 1,000,000 · GPT-5.6 Cyber 400,000 tokens
- Widest inputsClaude Fable 5.1Claude Fable 5.1: Text, Images, PDFs · GPT-5.6 Cyber: Text, Images
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Claude Fable 5.1 | GPT-5.6 Cyber |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 0 | 0 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 70 |
| Context window | 20% | 60 | 44 |
| Overall | 100% | 36/100 | 30/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | GPT-5.6 CyberOpenAI |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 164.8 | — |
| ECI rank | #4 of 148 | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 90.2% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 100% | — |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 70.8% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $10.00 (best) | $12.50 |
| Output | $50.00 (best) | $75.00 |
| Cached input | $0.25 (best) | $1.25 |
| Blended (3:1) | $20.00 (best) | $28.13 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Anthropic API | Official OpenAI API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens (best) | 400,000 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | No |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | claude-fable-5-1 | gpt-daybreak-red-latest |
| API providers | 29 (best) | 1 |
| Released | Sep 1, 2026 | Aug 7, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jun 2026 | Feb 16, 2026 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Claude Fable 5.1$200.00
- GPT-5.6 Cyber$275.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 36/100 against GPT-5.6 Cyber (30). It leads on inputs & features and context window. The score weighs price 50%, inputs & features 30%, context window 20%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Claude Fable 5.1 is cheaper at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). GPT-5.6 Cyber costs $12.50 input / $75.00 output per million tokens (official OpenAI API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $20.00 per million tokens for Claude Fable 5.1 versus $28.13 for GPT-5.6 Cyber (1.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Claude Fable 5.1 has an ECI of 164.8 and GPT-5.6 Cyber has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.6 Cyber yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Claude Fable 5.1 has the largest context window at 1,000,000 tokens, against 400,000 for GPT-5.6 Cyber. Maximum output per response: Claude Fable 5.1 up to 128,000, GPT-5.6 Cyber up to 128,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Claude Fable 5.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; GPT-5.6 Cyber accepts text and images. Claude Fable 5.1 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.6 Cyber are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Claude Fable 5.1 is the newest, released Sep 1, 2026. GPT-5.6 Cyber came out Aug 7, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Fable 5.1 Jun 2026, GPT-5.6 Cyber Feb 16, 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add GPT-6 AstraThree-way comparison
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 AstraOpenAI · ECI 166.5
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3Moonshot AI · ECI 157.6
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Grok 4.6xAI · ECI 156.6
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.8 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 156.6
- GPT-5.6 Cyber vs Claude Mythos 5Anthropic
- GPT-5.6 Cyber vs Fugu UltraSakana AI
