LLM Comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next 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.

Open live leaderboardClaude Fable 5 model pageQwen3.8 Flash Next model page
Rank #3 vs #19AskClash overall scores 82.0 vs 57.6.
Pricing $10.0/$50.0 vs $0.16/$0.47Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.
Proprietary vs Open WeightAnthropic vs Alibaba.

Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next benchmark comparison

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

MetricClaude Fable 5Qwen3.8 Flash Next
Overall Score82.057.6
Leaderboard Rank#3#19
ACB64.666.5
RWT9.0—
Coding Agent Index77.2—
HLE64.535.9
GPQA94.591.7
IFEval80.381.3
SWE-bench95.5—
SWE-Pro80.362.5
SWE-Atlas83.3—
Terminal-Bench88.0—
DeepSWE69.758.7
GDPval-AA1932.51743.0
OSWorld85.0—
Finance Agent56.3—
CharXiv93.590.6
MMMU-Pro92.7—
Tau289.2—
Input Price (per 1M tokens)$10.0$0.16
Output Price (per 1M tokens)$50.0$0.47
Context Window1M+1M
Benchmarks Published179

Claude Fable 5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next head-to-head charts

Claude Fable 5 leads 7 and Qwen3.8 Flash Next leads 2 of 9 shared benchmarks. Qwen3.8 Flash Next is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

Claude Fable 5Qwen3.8 Flash Next
Overall
82.0Claude Fable 5
57.6Qwen3.8 Flash Next
ACB
64.6Claude Fable 5
66.5Qwen3.8 Flash Next
HLE
64.5Claude Fable 5
35.9Qwen3.8 Flash Next
GPQA
94.5Claude Fable 5
91.7Qwen3.8 Flash Next
IFEval
80.3Claude Fable 5
81.3Qwen3.8 Flash Next
SWE-Pro
80.3Claude Fable 5
62.5Qwen3.8 Flash Next
DeepSWE
69.7Claude Fable 5
58.7Qwen3.8 Flash Next
GDPval-AA
1932.5Claude Fable 5
1743.0Qwen3.8 Flash Next
CharXiv
93.5Claude Fable 5
90.6Qwen3.8 Flash Next
Claude Fable 5
Input$10.0
Output$50.0
Workload$20
Context1M+
Qwen3.8 Flash Next
Input$0.16
Output$0.47
Workload$0.25
Context1M

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

More Claude Fable 5 and Qwen3.8 Flash Next comparisons

Explore how Claude Fable 5 and Qwen3.8 Flash Next stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Fable 5Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.8 Flash NextClaude Opus 5 vs Claude Fable 5Claude Opus 5 vs Qwen3.8 Flash NextClaude Fable 5 vs GLM-5.3GLM-5.3 vs Qwen3.8 Flash NextClaude Fable 5 vs Grok 4.6Grok 4.6 vs Qwen3.8 Flash NextClaude Fable 5 vs GPT-5.6 SolGPT-5.6 Sol vs Qwen3.8 Flash Next

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.