ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.8 Max vs Claude Fable 5

Qwen3.8 Max comes out ahead, 69 to 65 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 Max

    Released Aug 3, 2026

    69/100
    • ECI156.6
    • Price$2.00 / $6.00
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.8 Max

  2. Anthropic

    Claude Fable 5

    Released Jun 9, 2026

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

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Qwen3.8 Max is our pick

Qwen3.8 Max is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 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 · Qwen3.8 Max 156.6
  • Lowest priceQwen3.8 MaxQwen3.8 Max $3.00 · Claude Fable 5 $20.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextAbout the sameQwen3.8 Max 1,000,000 · Claude Fable 5 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsQwen3.8 MaxQwen3.8 Max: Text, Images, PDFs, Video · Claude Fable 5: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.8 MaxClaude Fable 5
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8694
Price25%270
Inputs & features15%9080
Context window10%6060
Overall100%69/10065/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

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

Qwen3.8 Max vs Claude Fable 5 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.8 MaxAlibaba (Qwen)Claude Fable 5Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)156.6162.2 (best)
ECI rank#20 of 148#7 of 148 (best)
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions92.7% (best)85.9%
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics74.7%87.0% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics99.4%100% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions45.8%70.7% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$2.00 (best)$10.00
Output$6.00 (best)$50.00
Cached input$0.25 (best)$1.00
Blended (3:1)$3.00 (best)$20.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Alibaba APIOfficial Anthropic API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesYes
AudioNoNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYeslow · medium · xhighYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDqwen3.8-maxclaude-fable-5
API providers2538 (best)
ReleasedAug 3, 2026Jun 9, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Jan 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.

  • Qwen3.8 Max$32.00
  • Claude Fable 5$200.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.8 Max or Claude Fable 5?

Qwen3.8 Max is the better all-round choice, scoring 69/100 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, Qwen3.8 Max or Claude Fable 5?

Qwen3.8 Max is cheaper at $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (official Alibaba 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 $3.00 per million tokens for Qwen3.8 Max versus $20.00 for Claude Fable 5 (6.7× 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 Qwen3.8 Max 156.6 (#20 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (159.6–166.1 vs 154.5–158.8), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: GPQA Diamond — Qwen3.8 Max 92.7%, Claude Fable 5 85.9%; FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Claude Fable 5 87.0%, Qwen3.8 Max 74.7%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Fable 5 100%, Qwen3.8 Max 99.4%; SimpleQA Verified — Claude Fable 5 70.7%, Qwen3.8 Max 45.8%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.8 Max and 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?

Qwen3.8 Max and Claude Fable 5 share the same 1,000,000-token context window. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.8 Max up to 131,072, Claude Fable 5 up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.8 Max accepts text, images, PDFs and video; Claude Fable 5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Qwen3.8 Max handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Qwen3.8 Max and Claude Fable 5 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.8 Max is the newest, released Aug 3, 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