text model comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Cyber
Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.6 Cyber are both current text models, from Anthropic and OpenAI. Claude Fable 5.1 is 20% cheaper per 1M input tokens than GPT-5.6 Cyber, $10 vs $12.50. Claude Fable 5.1 has the larger context window, 1,000,000 vs 400,000 tokens.
- Lower price per 1M input tokens
- Claude Fable 5.1$10 against $12.50
- Longer context window
- Claude Fable 5.11M tokens against 400K tokens
- Newer release
- Claude Fable 5.1Sep 2026 against Aug 2026
Data verified November 6, 2026 · Dataset 2026-11-06
Side by side
Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.6 Cyber, line by line
Prices in effect today, compared at the same tier wherever both list one. The better value in each row is highlighted.
| Fact | Claude Fable 5.1 | GPT-5.6 Cyber |
|---|---|---|
| Price | ||
| Price per 1M input tokens | $10 (better) | $12.50 |
| Price per 1M output tokens | $50 (better) | $75 |
| Independent benchmarks | ||
| Arena Text | 1504 Elo (#5 of 52) | Not measured |
| Arena WebDev | 1746 Elo (#6 of 46) | Not measured |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) | 90.2% (#5 of 41) | Not measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% (#6 of 38) | Not measured |
| Specs | ||
| Provider | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Release date | September 1, 2026 | August 10, 2026 |
| Access | API only | limited access |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 400,000 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | 128,000 tokens |
| Input | text, image | text, image |
| Output | text | text |
No independent benchmark has scored both models yet. Each rank counts the current models scored on that benchmark.
Charts
Against every current text model
Where Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.6 Cyber land among the current models of their task, on every independent benchmark, on price and on context.
Where each stands
Only Claude Fable 5.1 has a current Arena Text score: #5 of 52. Each bar is the share of current models it beats.
Independent benchmarks
Arena Text
Claude Fable 5.1:#5of 52
1,504 Elo · ahead of 90%
GPT-5.6 Cyber: Not scored
Arena WebDev
Claude Fable 5.1:#6of 46
1,746 Elo · ahead of 89%
GPT-5.6 Cyber: Not scored
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)
Claude Fable 5.1:#5of 41
90.2% · ahead of 90%
GPT-5.6 Cyber: Not scored
SimpleQA Verified
Claude Fable 5.1:#6of 38
70.8% · ahead of 86%
GPT-5.6 Cyber: Not scored
Price and context
Price per 1M input tokens
Claude Fable 5.1:#52of 58
$10 · cheaper than 5%
GPT-5.6 Cyber:#56of 58
$12.50 · cheaper than 4%
Price per 1M output tokens
Claude Fable 5.1:#52of 58
$50 · cheaper than 5%
GPT-5.6 Cyber:#56of 58
$75 · cheaper than 2%
Context window
Claude Fable 5.1:#27of 67
1M tokens · longer than 24%
GPT-5.6 Cyber:#56of 67
400K tokens · longer than 17%
Quality against price
Claude Fable 5.1 scores 1,504 at $20 (blended price per 1M tokens). The line joins the current models no other beats on both price and Arena Text score; hover any point to name it.
Quality against price: the data
| Model | Provider | Blended price per 1M tokens | Arena Text (Elo) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemini 4 Carbon | $4 | 1,528 | |
| Gemini 4 Argon | $4 | 1,520 | |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Anthropic | $8 | 1,509 |
| Muse Wonder | Meta | $8 | 1,507 |
| Claude Fable 5 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | $1.50 | 1,496 | |
| Muse Spark 1.3 | Meta | $2 | 1,495 |
| Claude Opus 5 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,492 |
| Kimi K3 | Moonshot Kimi | $6 | 1,488 |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | OpenAI | $8 | 1,485 |
| Gemini 3.6 Flash | $3 | 1,483 | |
| GPT-5.5 | OpenAI | $11 | 1,482 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,482 |
| Qwen3.8-Max | Alibaba Qwen | $3 | 1,482 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,481 |
| GLM-5.3 | Z.ai | $2.15 | 1,481 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.54 | 1,480 |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,477 |
| GLM-5.3-Flash | Z.ai | $0.24 | 1,477 |
| GPT-6 Astra | OpenAI | $20 | 1,476 |
| DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | DeepSeek | $0.52 | 1,476 |
| GPT-5.4 | OpenAI | $5.63 | 1,475 |
| Gemini 3 Flash Preview | $1.13 | 1,473 | |
| Grok 4.20 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,472 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | OpenAI | $4.50 | 1,467 |
| Grok 4.5 | xAI | $3 | 1,465 |
| DeepSeek-V4-Pro | DeepSeek | $1.98 | 1,465 |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,462 |
| GPT-6 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,458 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | $0.85 | 1,456 | |
| Grok 4.6 | xAI | $3 | 1,455 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.45 | 1,453 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.18 | 1,448 |
| Step 5 Preview | StepFun | $1.43 | 1,448 |
| Grok 4.3 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,442 |
| GPT-6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.20 | 1,441 |
| Grok 4.7 | xAI | $3 | 1,441 |
| Mistral Large 4 | Mistral AI | $1.05 | 1,432 |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Anthropic | $0.20 | 1,425 |
| GPT-4.1 | OpenAI | $3.50 | 1,415 |
| Solar Pro 4 | Upstage | $0.52 | 1,388 |
| GPT-4.1 mini | OpenAI | $0.70 | 1,383 |
| GPT-4.1 nano | OpenAI | $0.18 | 1,322 |
Cost
What each costs
Example workloads at each provider's listed rates, then every other rate either one lists. The cheaper figure in each row is highlighted.
The same work, priced
For 10M input and 2M output tokens, GPT-5.6 Cyber costs 1.4 times as much as Claude Fable 5.1, at each provider's listed rates.
10M input and 2M output tokens
GPT-5.6 Cyber costs 1.4× as much
- Claude Fable 5.1
- $200
- GPT-5.6 Cyber
- $275
The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached
GPT-5.6 Cyber costs 1.5× as much
- Claude Fable 5.1
- $112.25
- GPT-5.6 Cyber
- $173.75
| Workload or rate | Claude Fable 5.1 | GPT-5.6 Cyber |
|---|---|---|
| Example workloads | ||
| 10M input and 2M output tokens | $200 (better) | $275 |
| The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached | $112.25 (better) | $173.75 |
| The same, through the batch API | $100 | Not listed |
| Other listed rates | ||
| 1M input tokens, cached | $0.25 (better) | $1.25 |
| 1M input tokens, 5-minute cache write | $12.50 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, 1-hour cache write | $20 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, batch | $5 | Not listed |
| 1M output tokens, batch | $25 | Not listed |
Your own bill will differ. These figures use list prices and example workloads. The AI Model Cost Audit reviews your real usage, shortlists models that score as well for each task for less, and estimates the savings.
Launch price $100, regular price $150
Verdict
When to choose each
Claude Fable 5.1
Where it leads
- Lower input and output prices, $10 and $50 vs $12.50 and $75 per 1M tokens
- Larger context window 1,000,000 vs 400,000 tokens
- Cheaper cached input, $0.25 vs $1.25 per 1M tokens
- Batch pricing, $5 input and $25 output per 1M tokens
Best for
- Long-horizon agentic coding where a large prompt prefix is replayed across many turns
- Work where Claude Opus 5 at higher effort has already been evaluated and fell short
Watch out for
- Base input and output pricing is unchanged from Fable 5 at $10 / $50; the saving is entirely in cache reads, so a workload with little cache reuse sees no discount
- The 4.7-generation tokenizer produces roughly 30% more tokens for the same text than Claude Sonnet 4.6 and earlier, so per-token rates are not directly comparable across generations
- Anthropic’s launch comparisons are self-reported and were not reproduced independently here
GPT-5.6 Cyber
Where it leads
No measured lead over Claude Fable 5.1 in this data.
Best for
- Daybreak Red teams that need exploit validation and security testing at a lower price than GPT-6 Cyber
Watch out for
- Limited access: available only to approved Daybreak Red customers
- OpenAI rates it High but not Critical in cybersecurity, and says it sometimes writes shorter, less detailed vulnerability reports than GPT-5.6 Sol
- OpenAI's newer GPT-6 Cyber (November 5, 2026) scores 48.5% on ExploitGym in OpenAI's chart, against 32.1% for this model; no independent benchmark score is recorded here
From benchmark to production
Building on Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Public scores rarely hold on your own data. We test both models on your real tasks, then build the agent or pipeline around the one that wins.
AI Model Cost AuditLaunch price $100, regular price $150What the audit includes
FAQ
Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Cyber FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Claude Fable 5.1 is 20% cheaper per 1M input tokens than GPT-5.6 Cyber, $10 vs $12.50. For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Fable 5.1 costs $200 and GPT-5.6 Cyber $275 at standard rates.
Which is cheaper with prompt caching, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Claude Fable 5.1 charges $0.25 per 1M cached input tokens, 98% below its standard input rate, and GPT-5.6 Cyber $1.25, 90% below. With 9M of 10M input tokens cached and 2M output tokens, Claude Fable 5.1 costs $112.25 and GPT-5.6 Cyber $173.75.
Which has the larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Claude Fable 5.1 has the larger context window, 1,000,000 vs 400,000 tokens. Both return up to 128,000 tokens per response.
Further reading
More on Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.6 Cyber
Articles on Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.6 Cyber
- Grok 4.7 vs Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra: Real Cost per TaskSeptember 23, 2026
- Jev vs Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra: Which Model for Which JobSeptember 22, 2026
- GPT-6 Astra vs Fable 5.1: Two Scoreboards, Two WinnersSeptember 22, 2026
- Claude Fable 5.1: Same Price, 75% Cheaper CacheSeptember 2, 2026
- Fable 5.1 vs Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6: Which to UseSeptember 1, 2026
Related comparisons
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 4 Argon
- GPT-5.6 Cyber vs GPT-6 Cyber
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
- GPT-5.6 Cyber vs GPT-Rosalind-6
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- GPT-5.6 Cyber vs GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Grok 4.7
- Claude Mythos 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Cyber
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-6 Astra
- Claude Fable 5 vs GPT-5.6 Cyber
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 4.8
- GPT-5.6 Cyber vs GPT-5.6 Sol
Production evaluation
Choosing between Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-5.6 Cyber?
Public benchmarks narrow the shortlist. We run both on your own tasks, data and cost limits, then build the routing and review controls to run the winner in production.
- A head-to-head evaluation on your real workload
- Routing between models by cost and difficulty