whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard
Anthropic

Claude Fable 5

VS
Google

Gemini 3.1 Pro

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Claude Fable 5 is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 26.1% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: Gemini 3.1 Pro is 4.4x cheaper to run and delivers 1.8x faster throughput. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, Gemini 3.1 Pro offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of Claude Fable 5 fully justifies the cost.

Model Specs

Claude Fable 5

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+26.1%)
80.3%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
94.1%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$20.00Input: $10.00 | Output: $50.00
Speed
60.3 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Model Specs

Gemini 3.1 Pro

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
54.2%
Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+0.2%)
94.3%

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)4.4x cheaper
$4.50Input: $2.00 | Output: $12.00
Speed1.8x faster
109 tps
Context Window
1M tokens
Read our data collection methodology

Frequently Asked Questions

Gemini 3.1 Pro is cheaper than Claude Fable 5. Gemini 3.1 Pro has a blended cost of $4.50/1M tokens, which is about 4.4x cheaper than Claude Fable 5 at $20.00/1M tokens.

Gemini 3.1 Pro is faster than Claude Fable 5. Gemini 3.1 Pro generates 109 tokens per second (tps) compared to Claude Fable 5 which generates 60.3 tokens per second.

Claude Fable 5 is better for coding tasks. It scores 80.3% on coding evaluations (swe-bench-pro) compared to Gemini 3.1 Pro which scores 54.2%.

Want to customize weights or add more models?

Open our interactive dashboard where you can adjust your priority levels for speed, budget, or accuracy slider-bars and watch model rankings calculate dynamically.

Customize in Interactive Dashboard