ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Claude Fable 5 vs Kimi K3

Too close to call on our weighted score (Kimi K3 65, Claude Fable 5 65). The right pick depends on what you value most.

  1. Anthropic

    Claude Fable 5

    Released Jun 9, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI162.2
    • Price$10.00 / $50.00
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Claude Fable 5

  2. Moonshot AI

    Kimi K3

    Released Jul 16, 2026

    65/100
    • ECI157.6
    • Price$3.00 / $15.00
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Kimi K3

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Too close to call

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Kimi K3 65/100, Claude Fable 5 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Fable 5 for raw capability, Kimi K3 on price and Kimi K3 for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Fable 5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Fable 5 162.2 · Kimi K3 157.6
  • Lowest priceKimi K3Kimi K3 $6.00 · Claude Fable 5 $20.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextKimi K3Kimi K3 1,048,576 · Claude Fable 5 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsClaude Fable 5: Text, Images, PDFs · Kimi K3: Text, Images, Video
  • Self-hostingKimi K3Publishes downloadable weights
How the score is built
MeasureWeightClaude Fable 5Kimi K3
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%9488
Price25%013
Inputs & features15%8080
Context window10%6061
Overall100%65/10065/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Claude Fable 5 vs Kimi K3 specifications side by side
SpecificationClaude Fable 5AnthropicKimi K3Moonshot AI
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)162.2 (best)157.6
ECI rank#7 of 148 (best)#13 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions85.9%93.1% (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics87.0% (best)72.2%
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics100% (best)97.2%
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions70.7% (best)50.6%
Price per million tokens
Input$10.00$3.00 (best)
Output$50.00$15.00 (best)
Cached input$1.00$0.30 (best)
Blended (3:1)$20.00$6.00 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Anthropic APIOfficial Moonshot AI API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output128,000 tokens131,072 tokens (best)
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesNo
AudioNoNo
VideoNoYes
ReasoningYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · maxYeslow · high · max
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryOpen
API model IDclaude-fable-5kimi-k3
API providers3868 (best)
ReleasedJun 9, 2026Jul 16, 2026
Knowledge cutoffJan 31, 2026—
03 — Cost

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
  • Kimi K3$60.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Claude Fable 5 or Kimi K3?

It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Kimi K3 65/100, Claude Fable 5 65/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Fable 5 for raw capability, Kimi K3 on price and Kimi K3 for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Kimi K3?

Kimi K3 is cheaper at $3.00 input / $15.00 output per million tokens (official Moonshot AI 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 $6.00 per million tokens for Kimi K3 versus $20.00 for Claude Fable 5 (3.3× 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 Kimi K3 157.6 (#13 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (159.6–166.1 vs 154.9–160.4), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Kimi K3 93.1%, Claude Fable 5 85.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Claude Fable 5 87.0%, Kimi K3 72.2%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Fable 5 100%, Kimi K3 97.2%; SimpleQA Verified — Claude Fable 5 70.7%, Kimi K3 50.6%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Fable 5 and Kimi K3 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?

Kimi K3 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, Kimi K3 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Claude Fable 5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Kimi K3 accepts text, images and video. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

Kimi K3 publishes its weights and can be self-hosted; Claude Fable 5 is proprietary.

Which is newer?

Kimi K3 is the newest, released Jul 16, 2026. Claude Fable 5 came out Jun 9, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Fable 5 Jan 31, 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.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons