Comparison · most-requested pair

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 4.8

The most-requested comparison in the autocomplete expansion. Anthropic has not published a shared benchmark table for the two; comparison is on price, context window and capability. Claude Fable 5.1 has a 1M-token context at $10/$50; Claude Opus 4.8 has a 200K context at lower published rates.

No shared benchmark table

Anthropic did not benchmark Claude Fable 5.1 against Claude Opus 4.8 in the 1 September 2026 launch table. The most-requested comparison in autosuggest, but the published scores do not exist side by side. State the absence plainly.

Price and capability

Claude Fable 5.1 lists at $10 per 1M input and $50 per 1M output, with a 1M-token context window at standard pricing. Claude Opus 4.8 lists at lower published rates but with a smaller context window (200K). For long-context workloads the Fable family wins on cost per cached token; for short, latency-sensitive calls Opus 4.8 is the cheaper route.

Ready to test the workflow?

Create account & add credits

Behaviour differences

Claude Opus 4.8 is the documented fallback target for high-risk queries in some Anthropic enterprise deployments. Fable 5.1 introduces the anti-distillation context rule for accounts created on or after 31 August 2026; Opus 4.8 does not.

CapabilityFable 5.1Opus 4.8
Context window1,000,000200,000
Input $/1M$10.00lower
Output $/1M$50.00lower
Cache read $/1M$0.25not published
Five effort levelsYesNo
Anti-distillation ruleYes (new accounts)No

Frequently asked questions

Should I switch from Claude Opus 4.8 to Claude Fable 5.1?

Switch if your workload is long-context (over 200K tokens) or cache-heavy. Stay on Opus 4.8 if your workload is short, latency-sensitive, and you depend on the existing integration patterns.

Put Claude Fable 5.1 to work

Fund a controlled evaluation, start with a prepared prompt, and measure quality and cost on your own workload.