Claude Fable 5 vs Kimi K2.6
Claude Fable 5 
Kimi K2.6 Verdict
- Claude Fable 5 leads on quality: 70.5 vs 60.7.
- Claude Fable 5 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, knowledge, long context, multimodal, reasoning.
- Kimi K2.6 is stronger in instruction following, maths.
- Kimi K2.6 is 12× cheaper ($1.71 vs $20.00 per 1M blended).
- Claude Fable 5 streams 1.4× faster (63 vs 44 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5 | Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 70.5 | 60.7 |
| Agents & tools score | 74.4 | 45.1 |
| Coding score | 70.5 | 60.4 |
| Composite score | 91.8 | 68.6 |
| Human preference score | 71.6 | 60.8 |
| Instruction following score | 62.9 | 73.7 |
| Knowledge score | 71.4 | 58.6 |
| Long context score | 67.8 | 67.1 |
| Multimodal score | 69.7 | 63.7 |
| Reasoning score | 75.9 | 66.0 |
| Maths score | – | 53.8 |
| Blended price $/M | $20.00 | $1.71 |
| Output speed | 63 tok/s | 44 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 102.3 s | 103.2 s |
| Context window | 1M | 262k |
| GPQA Diamond | – | 90.8% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | – | 57.2% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | – | 25.6% |
| OTIS Mock AIME | – | 96.1% |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | – | 76.7% |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 34.9% |
| OSWorld-Verified 2.0 | – | 4.6% |
| SciCode | – | 53.5% |
| Remote Labor Index | 16.1% | – |
| WeirdML | – | 55.9% |
| APEX-Agents | 45.0% | 18.9% |
| FrontierCode | 53.5% | – |
| ProofBench | – | 16.0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 163.4 | 151.0 |
| LMArena Text | 1507 | 1461 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1533 | 1485 |
| LMArena Coding | 1551 | 1514 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1628 | 1509 |
| LMArena Vision | 1330 | 1281 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 49.7 | 31.3 |
| IFBench | 63.5% | 76.0% |
| AA-LCR | 82.3% | 81.0% |
| MMMU-Pro | – | 79.4% |
| AA-Omniscience | 43.3 | 5.3 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 62.9% | 43.9% |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 92.6% | 91.1% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 55.5% | 37.5% |
| SciCode (AA) | 61.0% | 51.5% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 98.5% | 95.9% |
| LiveCodeBench | 89.8% | 86.8% |
| MMLU-Pro | 91.5% | 87.6% |
| IOI | 72.3% | – |
| LegalBench | 88.6% | 84.7% |
| CorpFin | 71.8% | 66.7% |
| TaxEval | 76.9% | 74.7% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 80.5% | 53.6% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 95.0% | 76.2% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 93.2% | 89.1% |
| Vals Index | 66.0 | 43.5 |
| MCP Atlas | 83.3% | – |
| PRBench Finance | 53.9% | – |
| PRBench Legal | 52.6% | – |
| HiL-Bench | 56.3% | 18.7% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1340 | 1202 |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 88.8% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Fable 5 vs Kimi K2.6: questions
- Is Claude Fable 5 better than Kimi K2.6?
- Claude Fable 5 leads on quality: 70.5 vs 60.7. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Claude Fable 5 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Fable 5 better than Kimi K2.6 for coding?
- Claude Fable 5 scores higher in coding (71 vs 60 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Fable 5 better than Kimi K2.6 for agentic tasks?
- Claude Fable 5 scores higher in agentic tasks (74 vs 45 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Kimi K2.6?
- Kimi K2.6 is cheaper: $1.71 against $20.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Fable 5 or Kimi K2.6?
- Claude Fable 5 streams faster: 63 against 44 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Claude Fable 5 accepts more context: 1M against 262k tokens.