GPT-6 Astra vs Claude Fable 5.1 based on the benchmarks available so far
- Published
- 09/04, 03:26
- First discovered
- 09/04, 17:00
- Type
- Dev community · RSS
Public benchmark results comparing GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 have been collected and analyzed. Artificial Analysis currently indicates that Fable 5.1 has a higher Intelligence Index and Coding Agent Index. However, the Coding Agent Index comparison is influenced by the surrounding harness, meaning it's not a direct model-to-model test. Further real-world comparisons from users of both models would be valuable.
I collected the public benchmark results I could find for GPT-6 Astra and Claude Fable 5.1 and put them side by side.
GPT-6 Astra leads on several published coding, science and agent benchmarks, including Terminal-Bench and DeepSWE, while Fable 5.1 still performs better on some independent evaluations.
For example, Artificial Analysis currently gives Fable 5.1 a higher Intelligence Index and Coding Agent Index, although the coding-agent comparison also depends on the surrounding harness, so it isn't a pure model-to-model test.
Another interesting point is that both models have the same headline API pricing at $10/M input and $50/M output, although caching and long-context pricing differ.
I don't think there is enough independent data yet to say one is clearly better overall, but the current results make for an interesting comparison.
I collected the numbers here: https://llmlearner.com/compare/gpt-6-astra-vs-claude-fable-5-1
Would be interested to see more real-world comparisons from people who have used both.