BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelCoding plansLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases12

Claude Fable 5.2 vs GPT-6 Sol

Full profiles: Claude Fable 5.2 (Anthropic) and GPT-6 Sol (OpenAI): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 10 sources

As of 9 Nov 2026, Claude Fable 5.2 and GPT-6 Sol are neck and neck on quality (69.4 vs 62.9 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±6.6 margin), and GPT-6 Sol is 4.0× cheaper at $4.00 vs $16.00 per 1M tokens blended. Claude Fable 5.2 leads in every category we measure both in. GPT-6 Sol streams ~1.5× faster.

Key facts (as of 9 Nov 2026)

  • Claude Fable 5.2 scores 69.4 on the BenchLeader Index and GPT-6 Sol scores 62.9 (BenchLeader, 9 Nov 2026).
  • Claude Fable 5.2 costs $16.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 9 Nov 2026).
  • GPT-6 Sol costs $4.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 9 Nov 2026).
  • GPT-6 Sol streams ~1.5× faster than Claude Fable 5.2 (Artificial Analysis, 7-day median, 9 Nov 2026).
  • Of the 21 benchmarks both models have, Claude Fable 5.2 leads 19 (BenchLeader, 9 Nov 2026).
Claude Fable 5.2 benchmarks max Anthropic GPT-6 Sol benchmarks max OpenAIAdd 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 5.280 vs 67 category score; FrontierCode 2.0 (AA) 48.8% vs 35.6%High
ReasoningClaude Fable 5.278 vs 66 category score; HLE-Diamond (AA) 80.2% vs 45.2%High
KnowledgeClaude Fable 5.282 vs 62 category score; AA-Omniscience v1.1 66.8 vs 21.4High
Long documentsEither66 vs 67 category score; AA-LCR v1.1 83.3% vs 83.7%Either
Chat quality (human preference)–Only GPT-6 Sol has an Arena rating (64 category score)Not comparable
Lowest costGPT-6 Sol$4.00 vs $16.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.160 vs $0.640–
Fastest first answerClaude Fable 5.23.0 s (Claude Fable 5.2 (max)) vs 72.1 s (GPT-6 Sol (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 5.2 (max) and GPT-6 Sol (max) are neck and neck on quality (69.4 vs 62.9, within the ±6.6 margin).
  • Claude Fable 5.2 (max) is stronger in coding, knowledge, reasoning.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max) is stronger in long context, agents & tools, human preference, maths, multimodal.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max) is 4.0× cheaper ($4.00 vs $16.00 per 1M blended).
  • GPT-6 Sol (max) streams 1.7× faster (121 vs 72 tokens per second).

At a glance

SpecClaude Fable 5.2GPT-6 Sol
DeveloperAnthropicOpenAI
Released9 Nov 202622 Sep 2026
Context window (tokens)1,000,0001,050,000
Compared atClaude Fable 5.2 (max)GPT-6 Sol (max)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$8.00 / $40.00 / $0.200$2.00 / $10.00 / $0.200

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)GPT-6 Sol (max)Leader
Reasoning78.466.2Claude Fable 5.2
Coding80.266.5Claude Fable 5.2
Agents & tools–59.6not comparable
Maths–68.5not comparable
Knowledge81.761.5Claude Fable 5.2
Human preference–64.2not comparable
Multimodal–60.7not comparable
Long context66.466.6level

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 avg75ReasoningCodingKnowledgeLong contextClaude Fable 5.2, Reasoning: 78.4Claude Fable 5.2, Coding: 80.2Claude Fable 5.2, Knowledge: 81.7Claude Fable 5.2, Long context: 66.4GPT-6 Sol, Reasoning: 66.2GPT-6 Sol, Coding: 66.5GPT-6 Sol, Knowledge: 61.5GPT-6 Sol, Long context: 66.6

Not drawn, measured for fewer than two of these models: Agents & tools, Maths, Instruction following, Multimodal, Human preference.

ModelIndex

Where sources disagree

Across the 21 benchmarks both have, Claude Fable 5.2 leads 19, GPT-6 Sol leads 2. Every overall index that rates both puts Claude Fable 5.2 ahead.

Overall indexClaude Fable 5.2 (max)GPT-6 Sol (max)Leader
BenchLeader Index69.462.9neck and neck
AA Intelligence Index v5.064.644.2Claude Fable 5.2

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 5.2 (max)GPT-6 Sol (max)
Blended price per 1M tokens$16.00$4.00
Input / output per 1M$8.00 / $40.00$2.00 / $10.00
Cached input per 1M$0.200$0.200
Price per task: chat reply$0.015$0.0038
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.120$0.030
Price per task: code edit$0.108$0.027
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.640$0.160
Price per task: structured extraction$0.024$0.0060
Agentic coding session, input mostly cached$0.289$0.079
Cost per benchmark task (AA Index)$26.54$2.47
Output tokens per task (AA Index)274k54k
Of which reasoning193k35k
Time per task (AA Index)–7 min
Output speed72 tok/s121 tok/s
Time to first answer3.0 s72.1 s
Time to a complete answer–130.2 s

Per token is not per task: an average task of Artificial Analysis' Intelligence Index cost $26.54 on Claude Fable 5.2 (max) and $2.47 on GPT-6 Sol (max), and Claude Fable 5.2 (max) wrote 5.1× 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 5.2 (max) scores 69.4 and takes 3 s to its first answer token; Claude Fable 5.2 (high) scores 68.9 in 3 s, Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) scores 68.7 in 3 s. GPT-6 Sol (max) scores 62.9 and takes 72 s to its first answer token; GPT-6 Sol (xhigh) scores 58.6 in 24 s, GPT-6 Sol (high) scores 58.2 in 9 s. 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

115 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)GPT-6 Sol (max)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader69.462.9
Coding scoreBenchLeader80.266.5
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader81.761.5
Long context scoreBenchLeader66.466.6
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader78.466.2
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader–59.6
Human preference scoreBenchLeader–64.2
Maths scoreBenchLeader–68.5
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader–60.7
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$16.00$4.00
Output speedBenchLeader72 tok/s121 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader3.0 s72.1 s
Context windowBenchLeader1,000,000 tokens1,050,000 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–94.3%
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)–1483
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench88.8%†–
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench–88.7%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis74.3%47.9%
HLE-Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis80.2%45.2%
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize97.5%95.5%
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize92.5%89.6%
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize94.9%23.0%
CritPtArtificial Analysis35.4%30.9%
CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)Artificial Analysis76.5%66.5%
MysteryMechanismVals AI51.8%†30.2%
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–56.0%
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–56.0%
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–59.1%
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–97.3%
Coding
SciCodeSciCode–57.6%
FrontierCodeCognition–49.3%
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)–1520
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)–1674
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench79.2%†–
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench–81.8%
SciCode (AA)Artificial Analysis67.7%57.6%
IOIVals AI–82.6%
Code MigrationVals AI–57.2%
Show all 115 benchmarks
MetricPublisherClaude Fable 5.2 (max)GPT-6 Sol (max)
Coding
Code Migration v1.1Vals AI83.3%†–
ProgramBenchVals AI19.0%†2.0%
SWE-bench MultimodalVals AI62.3%†–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI93.8%†87.8%
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–2462
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis59.6%43.9%
GameBench 2 OverallDuelLab GameBench 2–72.9†
GameBench 2 by reasoning settingDuelLab GameBench 2–79.3†
Design Arena WebsiteDesign Arena–1285†
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis56.2%–
FrontierCode 2.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis48.8%35.6%
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench–50.3%
APEX-AgentsMercor–54.3%
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)–7
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench82.9%†–
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench86.9%†–
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench–52.9%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI–83.2%
GDPval-AA v2.1Artificial Analysis1831–
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis–49.4%
CyberBenchVals AI–78.0%
Finance Agent v2Vals AI–49.0%
Finance Agent v2.1Vals AI69.5%†–
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1Vals AI5.0%†–
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI–1.7%
Legal Research BenchVals AI46.1%†28.9%
SREBenchVals AI–30.5%
Tax Agent BenchVals AI32.1%†15.0%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI65.2%†44.4%
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI55.7%†30.0%
Arena SearchArena (LMArena)–1229
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs–14427.9†
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis76.4%61.6%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis24.2%25.2%
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1Harvey7.2%3.6%
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis17851476
Design Arena AgenticDesign Arena–1212†
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis73.3%30.0%
CWE-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis–64.2%
DeepSec-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis–46.3%
CyberGym end-to-end (AA)Artificial Analysis–0.0%
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–89.8%
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–90.0%
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–100.0%
ProofBenchVals AI–83.0%†
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench–96.4%
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)–1440
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–60.7%
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench81.5%†–
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench94.5%†–
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench–81.2%
AA-Omniscience v1.1Artificial Analysis66.821.4
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL–38.6%†
BioMysteryBenchVals AI83.7%†74.8%
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI–71.5%
Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1Vals AI77.4%†–
MedCodeVals AI–47.1%
MedScribeVals AI–82.0%
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI–56.6%
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–53.3%
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–26.4%
AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracyArtificial Analysis79.1%51.1%
AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis40.7%39.1%
HealthBench Professional (AA)OpenAI67.7%62.3%
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench–85.3%
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench–68.6%
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)–1448
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)–1457
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)–1430
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)–1466
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)–1466
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)–1232
LiveBench DesignLiveBench85.1%†–
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis–83.0%
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–36.9%†
AA-3DArtificial Analysis12711131
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis83.3%83.7%
MLCRArtificial Analysis–33.9%
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–164.1†
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench84.9%†–
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench–79.3%
AA Intelligence Index v5.0Artificial Analysis64.644.2
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis–47.6
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis–334
Vals IndexVals AI71.3†–
Vals Finance IndexVals AI63.6%†–
Vals RSI IndexVals AI–28.1%
Vals Science IndexVals AI63.7%†45.0%
AA Cyber IndexArtificial Analysis–36.8
Safety & honesty
FORTRESSScale AI SEAL–13.5%†

Data as of 2026-11-09. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

DuelLab GameBench 2, release gb2-20261103-eaea31df94e6 (https://benchmarks.duellab.org/releases/gb2-20261103-eaea31df94e6/), CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Scores mapped to BenchLeader model names; not endorsed by DuelLab.

What changed

  • GPT-6 Sol (max): BenchLeader Index 63.5 → 62.9.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): 2 score revisions.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): 1 score revision.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): 1 score revision.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): 6 new results (AA Intelligence Index v5.0, AA-Omniscience v1.1, CritPt v2 hard subset (AA)…).
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): 1 score revision.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): 1 score revision.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): BenchLeader Index 64.1 → 63.5.
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): 2 new results (AA Progress Index v1, HLE-Diamond (AA)).
  • GPT-6 Sol (max): 1 score revision.

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

Claude Fable 5.2 vs GPT-6 Sol: questions

Is Claude Fable 5.2 better than GPT-6 Sol?
Claude Fable 5.2 (max) and GPT-6 Sol (max) are neck and neck on quality (69.4 vs 62.9, within the ±6.6 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 9 Nov 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
Claude Fable 5.2 vs GPT-6 Sol: which is cheaper, and will that change?
GPT-6 Sol is cheaper today: $4.00 against $16.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Is Claude Fable 5.2 or GPT-6 Sol better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.2 scores higher in coding (80 vs 67 on the category index, where 50 is average). On FrontierCode 2.0 (AA), the top shared coding benchmark, it is 48.8% for Claude Fable 5.2 against 35.6% for GPT-6 Sol.
Which is faster, Claude Fable 5.2 or GPT-6 Sol?
GPT-6 Sol streams ~1.5× faster (121 vs 72 output tokens per second, Artificial Analysis 7-day median).
Which is better for long documents?
They are level on long-context benchmarks (66 vs 67). Both take about 1.1M tokens: Claude Fable 5.2 1,000,000, GPT-6 Sol 1,050,000.
More questions (3)
Which has lower latency?
Claude Fable 5.2 answers first: 3.0 s against 72.1 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 5.2 vs GPT-6 Sol?
Across the 21 benchmarks both have, Claude Fable 5.2 leads 19, GPT-6 Sol leads 2. Every overall index that rates both puts Claude Fable 5.2 ahead.
When was Claude Fable 5.2 released?
Claude Fable 5.2 was released on 9 Nov 2026.