Which is better: Claude Fable 5.2 or Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite?

Verdict: Claude Fable 5.2 ranks higher (#1 vs #61) and wins 3 of 3 shared benchmarks; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite costs less ($0.30/$2.50 vs $8.00/$40.0 per 1M tokens). AskClash compares Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite side by side across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, AskClash ACB, and context window so you can see which model wins on each benchmark.

How do Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite compare on coding benchmarks?

The comparison table shows SWE-bench, SWE-Pro, SWE-Atlas, Terminal-Bench, DeepSWE, and coding agent index scores for both Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side Claude Fable 5.2 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite comparison across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, context window, and AskClash RWT. Green marks the winner on each benchmark.

Verdict: Claude Fable 5.2 ranks higher (#1 vs #61) and wins 3 of 3 shared benchmarks; Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite costs less ($0.30/$2.50 vs $8.00/$40.0 per 1M tokens).

Open live leaderboard Claude Fable 5.2 model page Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite model page

Rank #1 vs #61AskClash overall scores 81.6 vs 17.0.

Pricing $8.00/$40.0 vs $0.30/$2.50Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Proprietary vs ProprietaryAnthropic vs Google.

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite benchmark comparison

Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.

Metric	Claude Fable 5.2	Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite
Overall Score	81.6	17.0
Leaderboard Rank	#1	#61
ACB	91.4	—
RWT	—	7.0
HLE	74.2	18.8
GPQA	—	83.8
SWE-Pro	93.0	54.2
Terminal-Bench	59.6	—
DeepSWE	74.3	—
GDPval-AA	1831.0	1140.0
OSWorld	—	74.0
Finance Agent	—	47.4
MMMU-Pro	—	79.0
MRCR	—	72.2
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$8.00	$0.30
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$40.0	$2.50
Context Window	1M	1M
Benchmarks Published	9	9

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite head-to-head charts

Claude Fable 5.2 leads 4 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite leads 0 of 4 shared benchmarks. Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

Claude Fable 5.2Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

Overall

81.6Claude Fable 5.2

17.0Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

HLE

74.2Claude Fable 5.2

18.8Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

SWE-Pro

93.0Claude Fable 5.2

54.2Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

GDPval-AA

1831.0Claude Fable 5.2

1140.0Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

Claude Fable 5.2

Input$8.00

Output$40.0

Workload$16

Context1M

Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

Input$0.30

Output$2.50

Workload$0.80

Context1M

Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.

More Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite comparisons

Explore how Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Opus 5.5 Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5 Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Fable 5.1 Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Claude Fable 5.2 vs Gemini 4 Argon Gemini 4 Argon vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite Claude Fable 5.2 vs Claude Opus 5 Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite

How to read this comparison

Benchmark scores

Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.

Token pricing

Lower is better for input and output prices. Green marks the cheaper model per 1M tokens.

Coverage matters

Models with fewer disclosed benchmark cells may have inflated percentile scores. Check the benchmark cell count for context.

This comparison page is generated from the AskClash LLM leaderboard cache. Open the live leaderboard for real-time scores and interactive filtering.