Skip to content
AIMODELRACE
AnthropicLanguage model

Claude Fable 5.1

Anthropic's Mythos-class top tier for the longest, hardest problems where cost is secondary.

Overall Intelligence

#4

of 56
0.5 pts behind #1

12

races led

240

weeks at #1

88.2

score

Released
Aug 20, 2026
2 mo ago
Context
1M
128K max output
Price
$10 / $50
per 1M in/out · $20.00 blended
Speed
54 tok/s
8.8s to first token
Modalities
text · image
outputs text
Weights
Closed
API and apps

The 30-second version

Anthropic's top tier, built for the hardest and longest problems. Fable 5.1 is the model you reach for when a task would take a skilled human days, and getting it right matters more than what it costs.

Key takeaways
  • 1Leads our long-horizon autonomy race: it can work productively on a single task for many hours.
  • 2Top-tier reasoning and research quality; excellent at synthesising large bodies of evidence.
  • 3Expensive ($10 / $50 per million tokens) and slower than Opus, so use it selectively.
  • 4Pairs well with Opus or Sonnet as the escalation path when cheaper models get stuck.

What you need to know

Purpose

A 'Mythos-class' research and engineering partner for problems at the edge of what models can do: novel algorithms, deep investigations and long autonomous projects.

What Anthropic optimised for

Maximum capability and depth of reasoning, with heavy investment in safety evaluations for autonomous use. Speed and cost were explicitly secondary.

Unique strengths

  • Sustains a line of investigation for hours, keeping notes and revisiting assumptions.
  • Excellent at research synthesis: reconciling conflicting sources and stating confidence.
  • Strong at novel problems where there is no pattern to copy.
Insight
How it differs from rivals. Compared with Opus 5.5 it is a few points stronger on the hardest reasoning and long-horizon work, but costs 2.5 times as much and runs at about half the speed. Compared with GPT-6 Astra it is the better choice for extended investigations, while Astra wins on computer use and competition math.

Where it ranks

Current snapshot · illustrative scores · click any race to watch it

CodingHard ReasoningMathScienceWriting & LanguageMultimodalTool Use & AgentsLong ContextTrust & FactualitySpeed & Cost

Fable 5.1Best on each axis

Overall Intelligence over time

#1 frontierFable 5.1Gemini 4 ArgonGPT-6 Astra
55.060.065.070.075.080.085.090.02025Apr ’25Jul ’25Oct ’252026Apr ’26Jul ’26Oct ’26

Best use cases

01

Multi-day engineering projects

New subsystems, complex migrations or performance work that needs sustained focus.

02

Deep research

Literature reviews, due diligence and technical investigations with many sources.

03

Escalation tier

The model your agent calls when cheaper models have failed twice.

Strengths

  • Long-horizon autonomy

    Leads the field on how long it can work unaided before needing help.

  • Research quality

    Strongest at weighing evidence and producing well-argued syntheses.

  • Hard reasoning

    Consistently in the top three on our frontier reasoning races.

Weaknesses

  • Cost

    One of the most expensive models in the race; easy to overspend on routine work.

  • Speed

    Around 50-55 tokens per second; not suited to interactive chat or quick edits.

  • Overkill for simple tasks

    Can over-think straightforward requests that Sonnet handles in seconds.

Prompts that play to its strengths

Open-ended investigation

Investigate why our recommendation model's click-through rate dropped 8% after the March retrain. You have read access to the training configs, data pipeline code and the evaluation notebooks.

Keep a running log of hypotheses, what you checked and what you found. Do not stop at the first plausible cause; rule out the alternatives. End with your conclusion, your confidence, and the experiment that would confirm it.

Why it works: Long, evidence-driven investigations with a log are exactly what it is built for.

Design review

Here is the design doc for our new event-sourcing system. Act as the most demanding principal engineer in the company. Identify the three decisions most likely to hurt us in two years, explain the failure scenario for each, and propose a concrete alternative with its trade-offs.

Why it works: Rewards depth of reasoning and foresight rather than speed.

When to choose it, and when not to

Pick something else when…

  • Routine coding, chat or summarisation: Opus 5.5 or Sonnet 5.5 deliver nearly the same quality for far less.
  • Latency-sensitive products: it is one of the slowest models in the race.

Update history

The distilled version first; open any release for the deeper breakdown.