BenchLeader
Menu

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Mythos 5.2

Full profiles: Claude Fable 5.2 (Anthropic) and Claude Mythos 5.2 (Anthropic): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 11 sources

As of 13 Nov 2026, there are not enough shared benchmarks for a verdict, and they cost about the same at $16.00 vs $16.00 per 1M tokens blended.

Claude Mythos 5.2 was released on 9 Nov 2026 and has no BenchLeader Index yet (it needs five independent results across two categories). So this page gives no quality verdict: it compares what is published so far for both, price and context window (no benchmark in common yet). First results are tracked on Claude Mythos 5.2's page.

Key facts (as of 13 Nov 2026)

  • Claude Fable 5.2 costs $16.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 13 Nov 2026).
  • Claude Mythos 5.2 costs $16.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 13 Nov 2026).
Claude Fable 5.2 benchmarks max Anthropic Claude Mythos 5.2 benchmarks AnthropicAdd 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
Lowest costEither$16.00 vs $16.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.640 vs $0.640–
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Not enough shared benchmarks for a verdict.
  • They cost about the same ($16.00 per 1M blended).

At a glance

SpecClaude Fable 5.2Claude Mythos 5.2
DeveloperAnthropicAnthropic
Released9 Nov 20269 Nov 2026
Context window (tokens)1,000,0001,000,000
Compared atClaude Fable 5.2 (max)Claude Mythos 5.2
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$8.00 / $40.00 / $0.200$8.00 / $40.00 / –

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 5.2 (max)Claude Mythos 5.2Leader
Reasoning75.6–not comparable
Coding79.7–not comparable
Agents & tools77.5–not comparable
Maths74.5–not comparable
Knowledge86.3–not comparable
Long context66.4–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 & toolsMathsKnowledgeLong contextClaude Fable 5.2, Reasoning: 75.6Claude Fable 5.2, Coding: 79.7Claude Fable 5.2, Agents & tools: 77.5Claude Fable 5.2, Maths: 74.5Claude Fable 5.2, Knowledge: 86.3Claude Fable 5.2, Long context: 66.4

No result on any of these domains: Claude Mythos 5.2.

Not drawn, no result for these models: Instruction following, Multimodal, Human preference.

Model, click to add or removeIndex

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 5.2 (max)Claude Mythos 5.2
Blended price per 1M tokens$16.00$16.00
Input / output per 1M$8.00 / $40.00$8.00 / $40.00
Cached input per 1M$0.200–
Price per task: chat reply$0.015$0.015
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.120$0.120
Price per task: code edit$0.108$0.108
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.640$0.640
Price per task: structured extraction$0.024$0.024
Agentic coding session, input mostly cached$0.289–
Cost per benchmark task (AA Index)$26.54–
Output tokens per task (AA Index)274k–
Of which reasoning193k–
Time per task (AA Index)46 min–
Output speed99 tok/s–
Time to first answer259.3 s–
Time to a complete answer456.8 s–

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Claude Fable 5.2 (max) scores 72.7 and takes 259 s to its first answer token; Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) scores 69.9 in 87 s, Claude Fable 5.2 (high) scores 68.4 in 29 s. Claude Mythos 5.2. 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

79 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 5.2 (max)Claude Mythos 5.2
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader72.7–
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader77.5–
Coding scoreBenchLeader79.7–
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader86.3–
Long context scoreBenchLeader66.4–
Maths scoreBenchLeader74.5–
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader75.6–
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$16.00$16.00
Output speedBenchLeader99 tok/s–
Time to first answerBenchLeader259.3 s–
Context windowBenchLeader1,000,000 tokens1,000,000 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub93.9%–
SimpleBenchSimpleBench94.9%†–
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench88.8%†–
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis74.3%–
HLE-Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis80.2%–
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize97.5%–
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize92.5%–
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize94.9%–
CritPtArtificial Analysis35.4%–
CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)Artificial Analysis76.5%–
MysteryMechanismVals AI51.8%†–
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub79.0%–
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub90.0%–
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub70.1%†–
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub99.2%†–
Coding
SciCodeSciCode67.7%–
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)1838†–
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench79.2%†–
Code Migration v1.1Vals AI83.3%†–
ProgramBenchVals AI19.0%†–
SWE-bench MultimodalVals AI62.3%†–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI93.8%†–
CursorBenchCursor60.0%–
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub2509.8†–
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub69.9%–
Show all 79 benchmarks
MetricPublisherClaude Fable 5.2 (max)Claude Mythos 5.2
Coding
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis59.6%–
Design Arena WebsiteDesign Arena1352†–
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis56.2%–
FrontierCode 2.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis48.8%–
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench65.8%–
Remote Labor IndexScale AI / CAIS41.3%†–
APEX-AgentsMercor80.1%†–
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)30.4–
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench82.9%†–
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench86.9%†–
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL80.0%†–
GDPval-AA v2.1Artificial Analysis1831–
Finance Agent v2.1Vals AI69.5%†–
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1Vals AI5.0%†–
Legal Research BenchVals AI46.1%†–
Tax Agent BenchVals AI32.1%†–
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI65.2%†–
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI55.7%†–
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis76.4%–
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis24.2%–
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1Harvey7.2%–
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis1785–
GDPxGDPx by SemiAnalysis16.4%–
Design Arena AgenticDesign Arena1368†–
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis73.3%–
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub95.1%–
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub100.0%–
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub99.7%–
ProofBenchVals AI100.0%–
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub94.0%–
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench81.5%†–
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench94.5%†–
AA-Omniscience v1.1Artificial Analysis66.8–
PRBench FinanceScale AI SEAL47.1%†–
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL49.0%†–
BioMysteryBenchVals AI83.7%†–
Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1Vals AI77.4%†–
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub90.5%–
AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracyArtificial Analysis79.1%–
AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis40.7%–
HealthBench Professional (AA)OpenAI67.7%–
Multimodal
LiveBench DesignLiveBench85.1%†–
AA-3DArtificial Analysis1271–
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis83.3%–
MLCRArtificial Analysis43.9%–
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub173.4†–
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench84.9%†–
AA Intelligence Index v5.0Artificial Analysis64.6–
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis358–
Vals IndexVals AI71.3†–
Vals Finance IndexVals AI63.6%†–
Vals RSI IndexVals AI37.9%–
Vals Science IndexVals AI63.7%†–
Safety & honesty
FORTRESSScale AI SEAL15.6%†–

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

What changed

  • Claude Fable 5.2 (max): BenchLeader Index 74.9 → 72.7.
  • Claude Fable 5.2 (max): 1 new result (Terminal-Bench).
  • Claude Fable 5.2 (max): BenchLeader Index 72.1 → 74.9.
  • Claude Fable 5.2 (max): 1 new result (Arena Agent).
  • Claude Fable 5.2 (max): 3 new results (SciCode, CursorBench, FrontierSWE).
  • Claude Fable 5.2 (max): BenchLeader Index 69.4 → 72.1.
  • Claude Fable 5.2 (max): 13 new results (GPQA Diamond, FrontierMath Tiers 1–3, FrontierMath Tier 4…).
  • Claude Mythos 5.2: first results.

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

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Mythos 5.2: questions

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Mythos 5.2: which is cheaper, and will that change?
They cost the same: $16.00 per million tokens blended. No price change has been announced for either.
Which is better for long documents?
Both accept 1,000,000 tokens of context.
When was Claude Fable 5.2 released?
Claude Fable 5.2 was released on 9 Nov 2026.