Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3 Pro
Claude Fable 5.1 
Gemini 3 Pro Verdict
- Claude Fable 5.1 (max) leads on quality: 70.3 vs 61.7.
- Claude Fable 5.1 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, maths, reasoning.
- Gemini 3 Pro is stronger in instruction following, long context, multimodal.
- Gemini 3 Pro is 4.4× cheaper ($4.50 vs $20.00 per 1M blended).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.1 (max) | Gemini 3 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 70.3 | 61.7 |
| Agents & tools score | 67.4 | 62.3 |
| Coding score | 78.4 | 58.9 |
| Composite score | 76.6 | 64.3 |
| Human preference score | 71.3 | 69.0 |
| Knowledge score | 75.9 | 60.9 |
| Maths score | 77.0 | 48.4 |
| Reasoning score | 71.9 | 67.1 |
| Instruction following score | – | 64.3 |
| Long context score | – | 64.5 |
| Multimodal score | – | 65.7 |
| Blended price $/M | $20.00 | $4.50 |
| Output speed | 40 tok/s | – |
| Time to first answer | 299.8 s | – |
| Context window | 1M | 1M |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 92.6% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | 90.2% | – |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 87.8% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 100.0% | 91.4% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 72.9% |
| SimpleQA Verified | 70.8% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam | – | 37.5% |
| Terminal-Bench | 57.9% | 69.4% |
| SimpleBench | – | 76.4% |
| GDPval | – | 40.3% |
| SciCode | 62.0% | – |
| Remote Labor Index | – | 1.3% |
| WeirdML | 92.9% | 69.9% |
| APEX-Agents | – | 31.5% |
| ProofBench | 100.0% | 20.0% |
| GSO-Bench | – | 18.6% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | – | 153.0 |
| LMArena Text | 1504 | 1486 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1522 | 1504 |
| LMArena Coding | 1517 | 1518 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1764 | 1439 |
| LMArena Vision | – | 1305 |
| LMArena Agent | 14.5 | – |
| LiveBench | 83.4% | – |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 91.7% | – |
| LiveBench Coding | 86.4% | – |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | 66.1% | – |
| LiveBench Mathematics | 97.0% | – |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 80.3% | – |
| LiveBench Language | 89.5% | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | – | 28.0 |
| IFBench | – | 70.4% |
| AA-LCR | – | 76.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 80.2% |
| AA-Omniscience | – | 15.3 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | – | 41.7% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 90.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | – | 39.7% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | – | 87.1% |
| LiveCodeBench | – | 86.4% |
| MMLU-Pro | – | 90.1% |
| AIME 2026 | – | 91.7% |
| HMMT February 2026 | – | 86.4% |
| MathArena Apex | – | 23.4% |
| SWE-Bench Pro | – | 43.3% |
| MCP Atlas | – | 70.3% |
| MultiChallenge | – | 65.7% |
| PRBench Finance | – | 39.2% |
| PRBench Legal | – | 40.6% |
| VISTA | – | 51.5% |
| MultiNRC | – | 59.0% |
| TutorBench | – | 53.7% |
| MMMU-Pro (official) | – | 81.0% |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | – | 80.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | – | 74.2% |
| SWE-bench Verified (any scaffold) | – | 77.4% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 97.5% | 75.0% |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 90.0% | 54.0% |
| BFCL Overall | – | 72.5% |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3 Pro: questions
- Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Gemini 3 Pro?
- Claude Fable 5.1 (max) leads on quality: 70.3 vs 61.7. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Fable 5.1 (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Gemini 3 Pro for coding?
- Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in coding (78 vs 59 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Gemini 3 Pro for agentic tasks?
- Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in agentic tasks (67 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 3 Pro?
- Gemini 3 Pro is cheaper: $4.50 against $20.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Both accept 1M tokens of context.