Polarison
Prices verified November 10, 2026

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5: pricing and benchmarks

Claude Opus 5.5 is 60% cheaper on input tokens ($4.00 vs $10.00 per 1M). Claude Opus 5.5 is 60% cheaper on output tokens ($20.00 vs $50.00 per 1M). On our document Q&A workload (50,000 questions a month), Claude Opus 5.5 costs $2,200 a month versus $5,500 for Claude Fable 5.1, 60% less. Roughly tied. Claude Fable 5.1 scores 164.7 and Claude Opus 5.5 scores 166.8 on the Epoch Capabilities Index, and their confidence intervals overlap.

Anthropic

Claude Fable 5.1

Input / 1M
$10.00
Output / 1M
$50.00
Capability (ECI)
164.7
AnthropicLower blended cost

Claude Opus 5.5

Input / 1M
$4.00
Output / 1M
$20.00
Capability (ECI)
166.8

Which should you choose?

Overall capability
Too close to call

Roughly tied. Claude Fable 5.1 scores 164.7 and Claude Opus 5.5 scores 166.8 on the Epoch Capabilities Index, and their confidence intervals overlap.

Advanced math
Too close to call

About even on FrontierMath (Tiers 1–3): 90.2% for Claude Fable 5.1 and 91.2% for Claude Opus 5.5.

Price
Claude Opus 5.5

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $8.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 input-to-output mix) vs $20.00 for Claude Fable 5.1, 60% less.

Best value
Claude Opus 5.5

Claude Opus 5.5 delivers equal or higher overall capability for 60% less.

Pricing and specs

Claude Fable 5.1Claude Opus 5.5
ProviderAnthropicAnthropic
API model IDclaude-fable-5-1claude-opus-5-5
Input / 1M tokens$10.00$4.00
Cached input / 1M tokens$0.25$0.20
Output / 1M tokens$50.00$20.00
Long-context rates——
Context window1M tokens1M tokens
Max output128K tokens128K tokens
Batch discount50% off50% off

Benchmarks

Claude Fable 5.1Claude Opus 5.5
Epoch Capabilities Index164.7166.8
GPQA Diamond· Science reasoning—90.6%
FrontierMath (Tiers 1–3)· Advanced math90.2%91.2%
SimpleQA Verified· Factual accuracy70.8%72.2%
ARC-AGI-2· Abstract reasoning90.0%93.3%
DeepSWE· Coding——
APEX-Agents· Agentic work68.6%73.5%

Source: Epoch AI, best recorded result per model (CC BY 4.0). A dash means no published score. See all benchmarks

Monthly cost for real workloads

WorkloadClaude Fable 5.1Claude Opus 5.5Difference
Support chatbot
100,000 replies a month, ~1,500 input tokens (system prompt + history) and ~400 output tokens each.
$3,500$1,400Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper
Document Q&A (RAG)
50,000 questions a month with ~8,000 tokens of retrieved context and ~600 output tokens each.
$5,500$2,200Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper
Coding agent
10,000 agent steps a month, ~40,000 input tokens each (70% read from the prompt cache) and ~2,000 output tokens.
$2,270$936.00Claude Opus 5.5 59% cheaper
Cached chatbot
The same 100,000-reply support chatbot, but 60% of each prompt (system prompt + conversation history) is served from the prompt cache.
$2,623$1,058Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper
Meeting notes
10,000 meetings a month summarized from ~12,000-token transcripts, ~1,000 output tokens each.
$1,700$680.00Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper
Bulk translation
200,000 short translations a month, ~800 input and ~800 output tokens each.
$9,600$3,840Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper
Content moderation
1,000,000 classifications a month, ~400 input tokens and ~80 output tokens each.
$8,000$3,200Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper
Article drafting
300 long-form articles a month written from a ~4,000-token brief and outline, ~5,000 output tokens each.
$87.00$34.80Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper
Code review bot
30,000 pull-request reviews a month, ~5,000 input tokens each (30% cached repository context) and ~700 output tokens.
$2,111$849.00Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper
Invoice extraction
100,000 documents a month parsed into structured JSON, ~1,200 input and ~250 output tokens each.
$2,450$980.00Claude Opus 5.5 60% cheaper

Estimates use standard list prices and ignore cache-write surcharges. Different tokenizers can count the same text differently, so test with your own prompts.

Interactive Estimator

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5 cost calculator

Standard-tier list prices. Long-context rates apply automatically where the provider publishes a threshold. Excludes cache-write surcharges, taxes, batch and volume discounts.

Claude Fable 5.1 pricing notes

Anthropic’s model for demanding reasoning and long-horizon agentic work.

  • Cache hits cost 2.5% of the base input price, versus 10% on other Claude models.
  • Cache writes cost $12.50 (5-minute cache) or $20 (1-hour cache) per 1M tokens.
  • Uses Anthropic’s newer tokenizer, which produces roughly 30% more tokens for the same text.
  • US-only inference (inference_geo: "us") costs 1.1x.
Anthropic official pricing ↗

Claude Opus 5.5 pricing notes

Anthropic’s recommended default model for most workloads, with adaptive thinking always on.

  • Cache reads cost 5% of the input price, against 10% on Claude Opus 5 and Sonnet 5.
  • Cache writes cost $5 (5-minute cache) or $8 (1-hour cache) per 1M tokens.
  • Fast mode costs $8 input / $40 output per 1M tokens.
  • US-only inference (inference_geo: "us") costs 1.1x.
Anthropic official pricing ↗

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than Claude Opus 5.5?
Claude Opus 5.5 is 60% cheaper on input tokens ($4.00 vs $10.00 per 1M). Claude Opus 5.5 is 60% cheaper on output tokens ($20.00 vs $50.00 per 1M). On our document Q&A workload (50,000 questions a month), Claude Opus 5.5 costs $2,200 a month versus $5,500 for Claude Fable 5.1, 60% less.
Which is more capable, Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Opus 5.5?
Roughly tied. Claude Fable 5.1 scores 164.7 and Claude Opus 5.5 scores 166.8 on the Epoch Capabilities Index, and their confidence intervals overlap.
How much does Claude Fable 5.1 cost per 1M tokens?
Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00 per 1M input tokens and $50.00 per 1M output tokens, and $0.25 per 1M cached input tokens on Anthropic’s standard tier.
How much does Claude Opus 5.5 cost per 1M tokens?
Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4.00 per 1M input tokens and $20.00 per 1M output tokens, and $0.20 per 1M cached input tokens on Anthropic’s standard tier.
Which has the larger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or Claude Opus 5.5?
Both offer a 1M-token context window.

Related comparisons