BenchLeader
Menu

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen

Full profiles: Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic) and Gemini 4 Hydrogen (Google): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 11 sources

As of 13 Nov 2026, Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemini 4 Hydrogen are neck and neck on quality (66.6 vs 63.4 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±4.3 margin), and Gemini 4 Hydrogen is 6.7× cheaper at $3.00 vs $20.00 per 1M tokens blended. Choose Claude Fable 5.1 for maths (72 vs 68), knowledge (71 vs 69), and coding (71 vs 69); choose Gemini 4 Hydrogen for fast first answers (16.4 s vs 162.2 s) and agents & tools (62 vs 60), where it also streams ~1.5× faster.

Key facts (as of 13 Nov 2026)

  • Claude Fable 5.1 scores 66.6 on the BenchLeader Index and Gemini 4 Hydrogen scores 63.4 (BenchLeader, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Claude Fable 5.1 costs $20.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen costs $3.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen streams ~1.5× faster than Claude Fable 5.1 (Artificial Analysis, 7-day median, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Of the 20 benchmarks both models have, Claude Fable 5.1 leads 11 (BenchLeader, 13 Nov 2026).
  • On Arena WebDev, Claude Fable 5.1 is rated 1742 and Gemini 4 Hydrogen 1704 (LMArena, as published by 13 Nov 2026).
Claude Fable 5.1 benchmarks max Anthropic Gemini 4 Hydrogen benchmarks high GoogleAdd a third model

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
CodingClaude Fable 5.171 vs 69 category score; Arena WebDev 1742 vs 1704Medium
Agents & tool useGemini 4 Hydrogen62 vs 60 category score; Terminal-Bench 56.4% vs 57.3%Medium
MathsClaude Fable 5.172 vs 68 category score; Arena Maths 1526 vs 1495Medium
ReasoningEither69 vs 70 category score; HLE-Diamond (AA) 60.1% vs 54.9%Either
KnowledgeClaude Fable 5.171 vs 69 category score; AA-Omniscience v1.1 46.3 vs 43.7Medium
Chat quality (human preference)Claude Fable 5.170 vs 68 on Arena votesMedium
Lowest costGemini 4 Hydrogen$3.00 vs $20.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.120 vs $0.800–
Fastest first answerGemini 4 Hydrogen16.4 s (Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)) vs 162.2 s (Claude Fable 5.1 (max)) to the first answer token–
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max) and Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) are neck and neck on quality (66.6 vs 63.4, within the ±4.3 margin).
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max) is stronger in coding, human preference, knowledge, maths.
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) is stronger in agents & tools, reasoning.
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) is 6.7× cheaper ($3.00 vs $20.00 per 1M blended).
  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) streams 2.0× faster (180 vs 88 tokens per second).

At a glance

SpecClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 4 Hydrogen
DeveloperAnthropicGoogle
Released1 Sep 202612 Nov 2026
Context window (tokens)1,000,0001,048,576
Compared atClaude Fable 5.1 (max)Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$10.00 / $50.00 / $0.250$1.50 / $7.50 / $0.075

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryClaude Fable 5.1 (max)Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)Leader
Reasoning69.369.6level
Coding70.568.8Claude Fable 5.1
Agents & tools60.261.9Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Maths72.067.8Claude Fable 5.1
Knowledge71.468.5Claude Fable 5.1
Human preference69.768.2Claude Fable 5.1
Multimodal67.5–not comparable
Long context67.4–not comparable

On one chart

Each domain on the index's own scale, where 50 is an average model. Click a domain to see the benchmarks behind it. Pick up to 5 models from the list.

2550 avg75ReasoningCodingAgents & toolsMathsKnowledgeHumanpreferenceClaude Fable 5.1, Reasoning: 69.3Claude Fable 5.1, Coding: 70.5Claude Fable 5.1, Agents & tools: 60.2Claude Fable 5.1, Maths: 72.0Claude Fable 5.1, Knowledge: 71.4Claude Fable 5.1, Human preference: 69.7Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Reasoning: 69.6Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Coding: 68.8Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Agents & tools: 61.9Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Maths: 67.8Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Knowledge: 68.5Gemini 4 Hydrogen, Human preference: 68.2

Not drawn, measured for fewer than two of these models: Instruction following, Long context, Multimodal.

Model, click to add or removeIndex

Where sources disagree

Across the 20 benchmarks both have, Claude Fable 5.1 leads 11, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads 9. Independent sources split: Claude Fable 5.1 leads on Arena Text; Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads on AA Intelligence Index v5.0.

Overall indexClaude Fable 5.1 (max)Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)Leader
BenchLeader Index66.663.4neck and neck
AA Intelligence Index v5.049.250.8Gemini 4 Hydrogen
Arena Text15021490Claude Fable 5.1

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page. Cost, tokens and time per benchmark task are measured: Artificial Analysis’ averages over its whole Intelligence Index run.

MeasureClaude Fable 5.1 (max)Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)
Blended price per 1M tokens$20.00$3.00
Input / output per 1M$10.00 / $50.00$1.50 / $7.50
Cached input per 1M$0.250$0.075
Price per task: chat reply$0.019$0.0029
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.150$0.022
Price per task: code edit$0.135$0.020
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.800$0.120
Price per task: structured extraction$0.030$0.0045
Agentic coding session, input mostly cached$0.361$0.056
Cost per benchmark task (AA Index)$12.99$1.87
Output tokens per task (AA Index)118k85k
Of which reasoning71k48k
Time per task (AA Index)22 min8 min
Output speed88 tok/s180 tok/s
Time to first answer162.2 s16.4 s
Time to a complete answer386.7 s63.3 s

Per token is not per task: an average task of Artificial Analysis' Intelligence Index cost $12.99 on Claude Fable 5.1 (max) and $1.87 on Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high), and Claude Fable 5.1 (max) wrote 1.4× as many output tokens for the same work, which a per-token price hides.

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Claude Fable 5.1 (max) scores 66.6 and takes 162 s to its first answer token; Claude Fable 5.1 scores 66.4 in 3 s, Claude Fable 5.1 (xhigh) scores 64.6 in 48 s. Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) scores 63.4 and takes 16 s to its first answer token. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

145 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherClaude Fable 5.1 (max)Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader66.663.4
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader60.261.9
Coding scoreBenchLeader70.568.8
Human preference scoreBenchLeader69.768.2
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader71.468.5
Long context scoreBenchLeader67.4–
Maths scoreBenchLeader72.067.8
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader67.5–
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader69.369.6
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$20.00$3.00
Output speedBenchLeader88 tok/s180 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader162.2 s16.4 s
Context windowBenchLeader1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens
Reasoning
Humanity's Last ExamScale AI / CAIS46.5%†–
SimpleBenchSimpleBench86.6%†–
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)15221514
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench91.7%†88.6%†
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench91.7%–
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis93.7%–
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis59.1%–
HLE-Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis60.1%54.9%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI93.4%†–
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize97.5%–
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize90.0%–
CritPtArtificial Analysis29.7%–
CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)Artificial Analysis52.5%61.5%
MysteryMechanismVals AI47.8%†–
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub48.0%–
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub58.0%–
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub65.5%†–
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub97.6%†–
ForecastBenchForecastBench65.7%†–
Coding
SciCodeSciCode63.1%–
WeirdMLWeirdML92.9%–
FrontierCodeCognition50.9%†–
GSO-BenchGSO-Bench88.2%†–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)15341518
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)17421704
Show all 145 benchmarks
MetricPublisherClaude Fable 5.1 (max)Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high)
Coding
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench89.7%†78.5%†
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench86.4%–
LiveCodeBenchVals AI90.5%†–
IOIVals AI90.8%†–
Code MigrationVals AI54.6%†–
ProgramBenchVals AI7.0%†–
SWE-bench MultimodalVals AI61.3%†–
Vibe Code Bench 1-100Vals AI28.0%†–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI90.3%†87.8%†
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAScale AI SEAL60.0%†–
SWE Atlas: RefactoringScale AI SEAL56.7%†–
SWE Atlas: Test WritingScale AI SEAL67.0%†–
MirrorCodeEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub93.3%–
CursorBenchCursor51.8%–
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub2143.2†–
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub56.3%–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis52.0%54.0%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis91.4%–
Startrise FrontendStartrise77.1%†–
GameBench 2 OverallDuelLab GameBench 287.2†–
GameBench 2 by reasoning settingDuelLab GameBench 293.9†–
Design Arena WebsiteDesign Arena1305†1316†
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis49.0%–
FrontierCode 2.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis31.6%36.3%
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench57.3%56.4%
Remote Labor IndexScale AI / CAIS17.9%†–
APEX-AgentsMercor68.6%†–
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)14.8–
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench74.2%†61.8%†
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench89.8%†77.1%†
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench66.1%–
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI85.0%†–
MCP AtlasScale AI SEAL87.2%†–
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL61.5%†–
GDPval-AA v2.1, normalised scoreArtificial Analysis62.7%–
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis47.2%–
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis49.5%–
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis57.5%–
CUA-benchVals AI13.2%–
CyberBenchVals AI70.4%†–
Finance Agent v2Vals AI58.9%†–
Finance Agent v2.1Vals AI–65.1%†
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1Vals AI–11.3%†
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI6.7%†–
Legal Research BenchVals AI55.3%†53.9%†
Robo-benchVals AI5.8%–
SkillsBenchVals AI61.5%†–
SREBenchVals AI22.9%†–
Tax Agent BenchVals AI50.8%†52.3%†
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI58.1%†54.0%†
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI40.0%†–
Time Horizon Index: KSPVals AI63.3%†–
Arena SearchArena (LMArena)1227†–
PostTrainBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub44.6%–
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs5421.6†–
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis59.4%74.4%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis26.2%30.0%
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1Harvey6.4%–
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis16691497
GDPxGDPx by SemiAnalysis8.5%–
Design Arena AgenticDesign Arena1327†–
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis43.3%41.4%
CWE-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis50.8%–
DeepSec-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis23.5%–
CyberGym end-to-end (AA)Artificial Analysis0.8%–
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub90.2%–
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub87.8%–
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub100.0%–
ProofBenchVals AI100.0%–
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench97.0%–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)15261495
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub70.8%–
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench80.3%†83.2%†
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench88.5%†86.8%†
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench80.3%–
AA-Omniscience v1.1Artificial Analysis46.343.7
MMLU-ProVals AI92.4%†–
LegalBenchVals AI88.5%†–
TaxEvalVals AI76.0%†–
PRBench FinanceScale AI SEAL50.8%†–
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL51.6%†–
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI76.7%†–
Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1Vals AI76.7%†75.8%†
MedCodeVals AI53.5%†–
MedScribeVals AI91.3%†–
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI74.9%†–
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub57.1%–
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub27.6%–
AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracyArtificial Analysis68.4%48.2%
AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis30.0%91.3%
HealthBench Professional (AA)OpenAI57.8%–
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench89.5%–
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench73.0%–
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)15011503
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)15021490
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)14901492
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)14851476
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)15101514
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)1322–
LiveBench DesignLiveBench81.6%†77.3%†
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI90.6%†–
MortgageTaxVals AI70.8%†–
GeoBenchGeoBench84.0%†–
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub41.9%†–
Code2Video-AAArtificial Analysis1325–
AA-3DArtificial Analysis1139–
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis85.3%–
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1498–
MLCRArtificial Analysis15.6%21.1%†
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub167.0†–
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench84.0%†77.0%†
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench83.4%–
AA Intelligence Index v5.0Artificial Analysis49.250.8
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis53.4–
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis340.8–
Vals IndexVals AI–68.5†
Vals Finance IndexVals AI–66.1%†
Vals RSI IndexVals AI36.1%–
AA Cyber IndexArtificial Analysis25.0–
Safety & honesty
FORTRESSScale AI SEAL13.7%†–

Data as of 2026-11-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

DuelLab GameBench 2, release gb2-20261110-2acac640a228 (https://benchmarks.duellab.org/releases/gb2-20261110-2acac640a228/), CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Scores mapped to BenchLeader model names; not endorsed by DuelLab.

What changed

  • Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high): 10 new results (Arena Text, Arena Hard Prompts, Arena Coding…).
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): BenchLeader Index 67.1 → 66.6.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): 1 new result (PostTrainBench); 1 score revision.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): 1 new result (MirrorCode).
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): 1 score revision.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): 1 score revision.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): 1 score revision.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): 1 score revision.
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): 1 new result (MirrorCode).
  • Claude Fable 5.1 (max): 1 score revision.

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for coding · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen: questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Gemini 4 Hydrogen?
Claude Fable 5.1 (max) and Gemini 4 Hydrogen (high) are neck and neck on quality (66.6 vs 63.4, within the ±4.3 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 13 Nov 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen: which is cheaper, and will that change?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen is cheaper today: $3.00 against $20.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 4 Hydrogen better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher in coding (71 vs 69 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Arena WebDev, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 1742 for Claude Fable 5.1 against 1704 for Gemini 4 Hydrogen.
Which is faster, Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 4 Hydrogen?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen streams ~1.5× faster (180 vs 88 output tokens per second, Artificial Analysis 7-day median).
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Gemini 4 Hydrogen better for agents and tool use?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen scores higher in agentic tasks (62 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Terminal-Bench, the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 57.3% for Claude Fable 5.1 against 56.4% for Gemini 4 Hydrogen.
More questions (4)
Which is better for long documents?
Both take about 1M tokens: Claude Fable 5.1 1,000,000, Gemini 4 Hydrogen 1,048,576.
Which has lower latency?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen answers first: 16.4 s against 162.2 s to the first answer token, as Artificial Analysis measures it. Reasoning effort drives most of this: a higher setting thinks longer before it answers.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 4 Hydrogen?
Across the 20 benchmarks both have, Claude Fable 5.1 leads 11, Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads 9. Independent sources split: Claude Fable 5.1 leads on Arena Text; Gemini 4 Hydrogen leads on AA Intelligence Index v5.0.
When was Gemini 4 Hydrogen released?
Gemini 4 Hydrogen was released on 12 Nov 2026.