Skip to content
Model Pareto

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher than Muse Spark 1.3 in all 5 shared categories. Claude Fable 5.1 costs 10× as much as Muse Spark 1.3 ($20.0 vs $2.00 per million tokens, blended 3:1 input:output).
Claude Fable 5.1Muse Spark 1.3
Focus

Coding: quality vs price

Compared models are ringed; the other 101 ranked here are greyed.

Lower price is better. Pareto frontier: Granite 4.2 3B, NVIDIA Nemotron 3 Nano 30B A3B, gpt-oss-20b, Ling-3.0-flash-VL, MiMo-V2.6-Flash, GLM-5.3 Flash, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash, MiMo-V2.6-Pro, Claude Sonnet 5.5, Claude Opus 5.5. 26 models are not plotted: Xing4.0-29B-A4B, Nex-N2.5-Pro, Atria Dawn Preview, Intern-S2-397B, Solar Open2 250B, Phi-4-reasoning-plus, Motif 3, Nex-N2-Pro, Nex-N2.5-Mini, A.X-K2, K2 Horizon 375B A23B, K-EXAONE 2.0 0803, K2 Horizon MoVA 36B A4B, Intern-S2-Preview (35B-A3B), Command A+, North Mini Code, G9v3-39A5B, Falcon-H1-34B-Instruct, Devstral 2, K2 Horizon 7B, Devstral Small 2, MiniCPM5-2B, Ling 3.0 Tiny, K2 Horizon 3.7B, K2 Horizon 0.9B, LFM2.5-2.6B.

26 models with no price data — shown in the strip at the left edge

Xing4.0-29B-A4B, Nex-N2.5-Pro, Atria Dawn Preview, Intern-S2-397B, Solar Open2 250B, Phi-4-reasoning-plus, Motif 3, Nex-N2-Pro, Nex-N2.5-Mini, A.X-K2, K2 Horizon 375B A23B, K-EXAONE 2.0 0803, K2 Horizon MoVA 36B A4B, Intern-S2-Preview (35B-A3B), Command A+, North Mini Code, G9v3-39A5B, Falcon-H1-34B-Instruct, Devstral 2, K2 Horizon 7B, Devstral Small 2, MiniCPM5-2B, Ling 3.0 Tiny, K2 Horizon 3.7B, K2 Horizon 0.9B, LFM2.5-2.6B

  • Best-value frontier (nothing is both cheaper and better)
  • Evidencestrong → weak
  • Estimated from other categories
  • Claude Fable 5.1
    Quality
    87.5
    Rank
    #3/103
    Price
    $20.0/M tok
    Speed
    66tok/s
    In$10Out$50/M tok

    vs Muse Spark 1.3: +12.7 quality · 10× price

  • Muse Spark 1.3
    Quality
    74.9
    Rank
    #8/103
    Price
    $2.00/M tok
    Speed
    219tok/s
    In$1.25▾Out$4.25▾/M tok

    vs Claude Fable 5.1: −12.7 quality · 0.1× price

Overview

Lab
Anthropic
Meta
Released
Sep 1, 2026
Sep 2, 2026
Weights
Proprietary
Proprietary
Input price
$/M tok
$10
$1.25Best
Output price
$/M tok
$50
$4.25Best
Blended price
$/M tok · 3:1 in:out
$20
$2.00Best
Output speed
tok/s
66
219Best
Context
tokens
1MBest
1MBest

Quality by category

0–100 within each category (100 = best tracked model). Rank is among all models ranked there. Click a row to focus it.

87.6±3.7Best
#3/103Mixed
74.9±4.5
#8/103Verified
97.6±3.5Best
#1/146Verifiedbest value
82.3±4.7
#10/146Verified
87.4±7.3Best
#3/82Verified
79.1±4.8
#6/82Verified
95.7±3.7Best
#2/182Verified
86.9±3.7
#6/182Verifiedbest value
89.6±5.8Best
#2/173Verified
87.4±5.8
#3/173Verifiedbest value

Coding benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

~#2/14~93.5%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/14~88.2%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
LiveCodeBench
third-party
~#2/20~92.2%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
Benchmarks in other categories (4)

Writing & chat benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

Vision benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

MMMU
day 0
~#2/3~71.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/3~71.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/8~91.2%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks

Hard reasoning benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

Agents benchmarks

Rank among models with a published score, and the leaderboard around each model. ~ italic = no published score, estimated from related benchmarks.

~#2/116~98.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/116~98.3%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
~#2/12~84.6%Estimated
estimated from related benchmarks
Not comparable across labs (2)