text model comparison
Claude Fable 5.2 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.8 Flash are both current text models, from Anthropic and Google. Gemini 3.8 Flash is 91% cheaper per 1M input tokens than Claude Fable 5.2, $0.75 vs $8. On GPQA Diamond, Claude Fable 5.2 scores 93.9% and Gemini 3.8 Flash 95.4% (Epoch AI, measured November 10, 2026). Both accept about 1.05M tokens of context (1,000,000 and 1,048,576).
- Higher GPQA Diamond
- Gemini 3.8 Flash95.4% against 93.9%
- Lower price per 1M input tokens
- Gemini 3.8 Flash$0.75 against $8
- Longer context window
- Gemini 3.8 Flash1.05M tokens against 1M tokens
- Newer release
- Claude Fable 5.2Nov 2026 against Sep 2026
Data verified November 10, 2026 · Dataset 2026-11-10
Side by side
Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.8 Flash, 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 5.2 | Gemini 3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Price | ||
| Price per 1M input tokens | $8 | $0.75 (better) |
| Price per 1M output tokens | $40 | $3.75 (better) |
| Independent benchmarks | ||
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% (#12 of 43) | 95.4% (#4 of 43) (better) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) | 95.1% (#1 of 43) (better) | 68.4% (#28 of 43) |
| SimpleQA Verified | 94% (#1 of 40) (better) | 69.7% (#9 of 40) |
| Arena Text | Not measured | 1497 Elo (#7 of 53) |
| Arena WebDev | Not measured | 1584 Elo (#28 of 48) |
| Specs | ||
| Provider | Anthropic | |
| Release date | November 9, 2026 | September 2, 2026 |
| Access | API only | API only |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | 65,536 tokens |
| Input | text, image | text, image, audio, video |
| Output | text | text |
Charts
Against every current text model
Where Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.8 Flash land among the current models of their task, on every independent benchmark, on price and on context.
Where each stands
On GPQA Diamond, Claude Fable 5.2 ranks #12 and Gemini 3.8 Flash #4 of 43 current models. Each bar is the share of current models it beats: on score, price and context.
Independent benchmarks
Arena Text
Claude Fable 5.2: Not scored
Gemini 3.8 Flash:#7of 53
1,497 Elo · ahead of 88%
Arena WebDev
Claude Fable 5.2: Not scored
Gemini 3.8 Flash:#28of 48
1,584 Elo · ahead of 43%
GPQA Diamond
Claude Fable 5.2:#12of 43
93.9% · ahead of 71%
Gemini 3.8 Flash:#4of 43
95.4% · ahead of 90%
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)
Claude Fable 5.2:#1of 43
95.1% · ahead of 100%
Gemini 3.8 Flash:#28of 43
68.4% · ahead of 36%
SimpleQA Verified
Claude Fable 5.2:#1of 40
94% · ahead of 100%
Gemini 3.8 Flash:#9of 40
69.7% · ahead of 77%
Price and context
Price per 1M input tokens
Claude Fable 5.2:#53of 61
$8 · cheaper than 12%
Gemini 3.8 Flash:#22of 61
$0.75 · cheaper than 65%
Price per 1M output tokens
Claude Fable 5.2:#53of 61
$40 · cheaper than 12%
Gemini 3.8 Flash:#26of 61
$3.75 · cheaper than 58%
Context window
Claude Fable 5.2:#28of 70
1M tokens · longer than 23%
Gemini 3.8 Flash:#12of 70
1.05M tokens · longer than 67%
Quality against price
Gemini 3.8 Flash scores 1,497 at $1.50 (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 | 1,526 | |
| Gemini 4 Argon | $4 | 1,522 | |
| Muse Wonder | Meta | $8 | 1,511 |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Anthropic | $8 | 1,506 |
| Claude Fable 5 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,503 |
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | $1.50 | 1,497 | |
| Muse Spark 1.3 | Meta | $2 | 1,496 |
| Claude Opus 5 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,490 |
| Kimi K3 | Moonshot Kimi | $6 | 1,487 |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | OpenAI | $8 | 1,485 |
| Qwen3.8-Max | Alibaba Qwen | $3 | 1,484 |
| Gemini 3.6 Flash | $3 | 1,483 | |
| GLM-5.3 | Z.ai | $2.15 | 1,483 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,482 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,482 |
| GPT-5.5 | OpenAI | $11 | 1,481 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.54 | 1,480 |
| GPT-5.4 | OpenAI | $5.63 | 1,475 |
| DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | DeepSeek | $0.52 | 1,475 |
| GPT-6 Astra | OpenAI | $20 | 1,474 |
| GLM-5.3-Flash | Z.ai | $0.24 | 1,474 |
| Gemini 3 Flash Preview | $1.13 | 1,473 | |
| Grok 4.20 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,472 |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,472 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | OpenAI | $4.50 | 1,468 |
| Grok 4.5 | xAI | $3 | 1,466 |
| DeepSeek-V4-Pro | DeepSeek | $1.98 | 1,464 |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,461 |
| GPT-6 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,457 |
| Grok 4.6 | xAI | $3 | 1,456 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | $0.85 | 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 |
| Grok 4.7 | xAI | $3 | 1,442 |
| GPT-6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.20 | 1,441 |
| Mistral Large 4 | Mistral AI | $1.05 | 1,423 |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Anthropic | $0.20 | 1,422 |
| GPT-4.1 | OpenAI | $3.50 | 1,415 |
| Inkling 2 Small | Thinking Machines Lab | $0.47 | 1,412 |
| Solar Pro 4 | Upstage | $0.52 | 1,387 |
| 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, Claude Fable 5.2 costs 11 times as much as Gemini 3.8 Flash, at each provider's listed rates.
10M input and 2M output tokens
Claude Fable 5.2 costs 11× as much
- Claude Fable 5.2
- $160
- Gemini 3.8 Flash
- $15
The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached
Claude Fable 5.2 costs 10× as much
- Claude Fable 5.2
- $89.80
- Gemini 3.8 Flash
- $8.93
The same, through the batch API
Claude Fable 5.2 costs 11× as much
- Claude Fable 5.2
- $80
- Gemini 3.8 Flash
- $7.50
| Workload or rate | Claude Fable 5.2 | Gemini 3.8 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| Example workloads | ||
| 10M input and 2M output tokens | $160 | $15 (better) |
| The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached | $89.80 | $8.93 (better) |
| The same, through the batch API | $80 | $7.50 (better) |
| Other listed rates | ||
| 1M input tokens, cached | $0.20 | $0.075 (better) |
| 1M input tokens, 5-minute cache write | $10 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, 1-hour cache write | $16 | Not listed |
| 1M input tokens, batch | $4 | $0.375 (better) |
| 1M output tokens, batch | $20 | $1.875 (better) |
| 1M input tokens, priority | Not listed | $1.35 |
| 1M output tokens, priority | Not listed | $6.75 |
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 5.2
Where it leads
- Higher FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) score, 95.1% vs 68.4%
- Higher SimpleQA Verified score, 94% vs 69.7%
- Longer responses, up to 128,000 vs 65,536 output tokens
Best for
- The hardest open-ended coding, research and agent runs, where Claude Opus 5.5 at high effort falls short
- Advising or orchestrating cheaper Claude models in a multi-agent setup
Watch out for
- Gemini 4 Carbon scores higher on AutomationBench in Anthropic's own table (53.9% against 51.4%)
- Safety classifiers block most penetration testing, exploit development and research biology requests and answer them with an older model (Claude Opus 4.8 for cybersecurity, Claude Opus 5 for biology); vetted organisations use Claude Mythos 5.2 for that work
- Anthropic recommends starting most coding and knowledge work on Claude Opus 5.5, at half the price, and moving up to Fable only when it falls short; Arena has not rated Fable 5.2 yet
Gemini 3.8 Flash
Where it leads
- Lower input and output prices, $0.75 and $3.75 vs $8 and $40 per 1M tokens
- Higher GPQA Diamond score, 95.4% vs 93.9%
- Accepts audio and video input
- Cheaper cached input, $0.075 vs $0.20 per 1M tokens
- Cheaper batch processing, $7.50 vs $80 for 10M input and 2M output tokens
Best for
- High-volume agentic and coding workloads where per-token cost dominates the decision
- Multimodal pipelines that need audio, video and PDF input in one model
Watch out for
- The listed price is promotional and ends 31 December 2026; on 1 January 2027 input and output both double, to $1.50 and $7.50, and cached input goes from $0.075 to $0.15
- Output pricing is billed inclusive of thinking tokens, so reasoning-heavy prompts cost more than the output length suggests
- Google’s published comparisons are against its own previous Flash release and were not independently reproduced here
From benchmark to production
Building on Claude Fable 5.2 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?
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 5.2 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.2 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?
Gemini 3.8 Flash is 91% cheaper per 1M input tokens than Claude Fable 5.2, $0.75 vs $8. For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Fable 5.2 costs $160 and Gemini 3.8 Flash $15 at standard rates.
Which is cheaper with prompt caching, Claude Fable 5.2 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?
Claude Fable 5.2 charges $0.20 per 1M cached input tokens, 98% below its standard input rate, and Gemini 3.8 Flash $0.075, 90% below. With 9M of 10M input tokens cached and 2M output tokens, Claude Fable 5.2 costs $89.80 and Gemini 3.8 Flash $8.93.
Which scores higher on independent benchmarks, Claude Fable 5.2 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?
Gemini 3.8 Flash leads on GPQA Diamond, 95.4% to 93.9%; Claude Fable 5.2 leads on FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2), 95.1% to 68.4%; Claude Fable 5.2 leads on SimpleQA Verified, 94% to 69.7%. Scores are independent evaluations, not either vendor's launch figures.
Which has the larger context window, Claude Fable 5.2 or Gemini 3.8 Flash?
Both accept about 1.05M tokens of context (1,000,000 and 1,048,576). Claude Fable 5.2 returns up to 128,000 tokens per response, Gemini 3.8 Flash 65,536.
How do Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.8 Flash differ in features?
Claude Fable 5.2 takes text and image input; Gemini 3.8 Flash takes text, image, audio and video.
Further reading
More on Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.8 Flash
Articles on Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Claude Fable 5.2 vs Opus 5.5, GPT-6 Astra and Mythos 5.2November 10, 2026
- Gemini 3.8 Flash TTS: Price, Rankings and the Fine PrintSeptember 25, 2026
Related comparisons
- Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Opus 4.8
- Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs Gemini 4 Argon
- Claude Fable 5.2 vs GPT-6 Astra
- Gemini 3.8 Flash vs GPT-6.1 Sol
- Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Fable 5.2
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Fable 5.2
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Mythos 5.2
- DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
Production evaluation
Choosing between Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.8 Flash?
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