Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen 3.8 Max Prime
Qwen 3.8 Max Prime comes out ahead, 42 to 36 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
AnthropicClaude Fable 5.1
36/100- ECI164.8
- Price$10.00 / $50.00
- Context1M
- Our pick
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen 3.8 Max Prime
42/100- ECI—
- Price$4.00 / $12.00
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Qwen 3.8 Max Prime is our pick
Qwen 3.8 Max Prime is the better all-round choice, scoring 42/100 against Claude Fable 5.1 (36). It leads on price. 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 priceQwen 3.8 Max PrimeQwen 3.8 Max Prime $6.00 · Claude Fable 5.1 $20.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextAbout the sameClaude Fable 5.1 1,000,000 · Qwen 3.8 Max Prime 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsClaude Fable 5.1: Text, Images, PDFs · Qwen 3.8 Max Prime: Text, Images, Video
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Claude Fable 5.1 | Qwen 3.8 Max Prime |
|---|---|---|---|
| Price | 50% | 0 | 13 |
| Inputs & features | 30% | 80 | 80 |
| Context window | 20% | 60 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 36/100 | 42/100 |
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 | Qwen 3.8 Max PrimeAlibaba (Qwen) |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | $4.00 (best) |
| Output | $50.00 | $12.00 (best) |
| Cached input | $0.25 | — |
| Blended (3:1) | $20.00 | $6.00 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Anthropic API | Median of 4 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No |
| Video | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | claude-fable-5-1 | — |
| API providers | 29 (best) | 4 |
| Released | Sep 1, 2026 | Sep 23, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jun 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
- Qwen 3.8 Max Prime$64.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Claude Fable 5.1 or Qwen 3.8 Max Prime?
Qwen 3.8 Max Prime is the better all-round choice, scoring 42/100 against Claude Fable 5.1 (36). It leads on price. 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 Qwen 3.8 Max Prime?
Qwen 3.8 Max Prime is cheaper at $4.00 input / $12.00 output per million tokens (median across 4 API providers). Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00 input / $50.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $6.00 per million tokens for Qwen 3.8 Max Prime versus $20.00 for Claude Fable 5.1 (3.3× 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 Qwen 3.8 Max Prime has not been scored yet.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Fable 5.1 and Qwen 3.8 Max Prime 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 and Qwen 3.8 Max Prime share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Claude Fable 5.1 up to 128,000, Qwen 3.8 Max Prime up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Claude Fable 5.1 accepts text, images and PDFs; Qwen 3.8 Max Prime accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
No. Claude Fable 5.1 and Qwen 3.8 Max Prime are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Qwen 3.8 Max Prime is the newest, released Sep 23, 2026. Claude Fable 5.1 came out Sep 1, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Fable 5.1 Jun 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
- Qwen 3.8 Max Prime vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro-UltraSpeedXiaomi
- Qwen 3.8 Max Prime vs ParetoUnbiased
