Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview comes out ahead, 68 to 65 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
AnthropicClaude Fable 5
65/100- ECI162.2
- Price$10.00 / $50.00
- Context1M
- Our pick
GoogleGemini 3.1 Pro Preview
68/100- ECI154.8
- Price$2.00 / $12.00
- Context1.05M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is our pick
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Claude Fable 5 (65). It leads on price and inputs & features. Claude Fable 5 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityClaude Fable 5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Fable 5 162.2 · Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 154.8
- Lowest priceGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGemini 3.1 Pro Preview $4.50 · Claude Fable 5 $20.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGemini 3.1 Pro Preview 1,048,576 · Claude Fable 5 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsGemini 3.1 Pro PreviewClaude Fable 5: Text, Images, PDFs · Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Claude Fable 5 | Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 94 | 84 |
| Price | 25% | 0 | 19 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 80 | 100 |
| Context window | 10% | 60 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 65/100 | 68/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Claude Fable 5Anthropic | Gemini 3.1 Pro PreviewGoogle |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 162.2 (best) | 154.8 |
| ECI rank | #7 of 148 (best) | #31 of 148 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 85.9% | 94.4% (best) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 87.0% (best) | 59.7% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 100% (best) | 95.6% |
| SWE-bench VerifiedFixing real GitHub issues | — | 75.6% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 70.7% | 73.5% (best) |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $10.00 | $2.00 (best) |
| Output | $50.00 | $12.00 (best) |
| Cached input | $1.00 | $0.20 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $20.00 | $4.50 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Over 200K: $4.00 / $18.00 |
| Price source | Official Anthropic API | Official Google API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens (best) | 65,536 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | Yes |
| Audio | No | Yes |
| Video | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yeslow · medium · high |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | claude-fable-5 | gemini-3.1-pro-preview |
| API providers | 38 (best) | 26 |
| Released | Jun 9, 2026 | Feb 19, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Jan 31, 2026 | Jan 2025 |
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$200.00
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview$44.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Claude Fable 5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is the better all-round choice, scoring 68/100 against Claude Fable 5 (65). It leads on price and inputs & features. Claude Fable 5 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview is cheaper at $2.00 input / $12.00 output per million tokens (official Google API price). Claude Fable 5 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 $4.50 per million tokens for Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview versus $20.00 for Claude Fable 5 (4.4× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Claude Fable 5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Fable 5 162.2 (#7 of 148) and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 154.8 (#31 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (159.6–166.1 vs 152.6–157.3), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 94.4%, Claude Fable 5 85.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Claude Fable 5 87.0%, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 59.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Fable 5 100%, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 95.6%; SimpleQA Verified — Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview 73.5%, Claude Fable 5 70.7%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Fable 5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Fable 5 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Claude Fable 5. Maximum output per response: Claude Fable 5 up to 128,000, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview up to 65,536 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Claude Fable 5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Claude Fable 5 and Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Claude Fable 5 is the newest, released Jun 9, 2026. Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview came out Feb 19, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Fable 5 Jan 31, 2026, Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview Jan 2025.
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-5.6 SolThree-way comparison
- Claude Fable 5 vs GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI · ECI 161.8
- Claude Fable 5 vs Kimi K3Moonshot AI · ECI 157.6
- Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.8 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 156.6
- Claude Fable 5 vs Grok 4.6xAI · ECI 156.6
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs GPT-5.3 CodexOpenAI · ECI 156.8
- Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs Qwen3.7 MaxAlibaba (Qwen) · ECI 153.7
