Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic) and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 (DeepSeek) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 24 October 2026

As of 24 October 2026, Claude Fable 5.1 holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#3 vs #31); DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is 25.3× cheaper per output token ($1.98/1M vs $50.00/1M); and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 ships open weights.

Which should you choose?

Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #3 against #31 (85.6 vs 74.2 points).
  • Arena text is your yardstick — 1503 against 1465.
  • Arena coding is your yardstick — 1537 against 1505.
  • ARC-AGI-2 is your yardstick — 90.0% against 61.3%.
  • AA Intelligence Index is your yardstick — 53.4 against 36.0.
  • AA Terminal-Bench 2.1 is your yardstick — 91.4% against 78.7%.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 59.1% against 41.0%.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Claude Fable 5.1 was listed 1 September 2026, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 12 August 2026.

Choose DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 if…

  • API cost matters — $1.98/1M output tokens against $50.00/1M, about 25.3× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $0.66/1M against $10.00/1M.
  • you want to self-host: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 ships open weights while Claude Fable 5.1 is no linked weights.
  • you want provider choice — 21 listed API providers against 4.

Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
FieldClaude Fable 5.1AnthropicDeepSeek V4 Pro 0813DeepSeek
ModelCap Index position#3#31
Index score85.674.2
EvidenceMeasuredMeasured
Input price / 1M tokens$10.00$0.66
Output price / 1M tokens$50.00$1.98
Context window1M tokens1M tokens
Declared route output cap128K393K
API providers listed421
Weight accessNo linked weightsOpen weights
Input modalitiesText, Image, FileText
First listed1 September 202612 August 2026
PublisherAnthropicDeepSeek

Evidence: 4 public benchmark observations across 4 boards · 3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813

Public benchmark boards where Claude Fable 5.1 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 has a published result
BoardClaude Fable 5.1DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813Leads
Arena textArena (LMArena)15031497–1509Max14651458–1471HighClaude Fable 5.1
Arena codingArena (LMArena)15371527–1548Max15051493–1516HighClaude Fable 5.1
LMArena AgentLMArena13.9%12.0%–15.9%Max—Only one result
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize Foundation90.0%Max61.3%MaxClaude Fable 5.1
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis53.4Reasoning36.0MaxClaude Fable 5.1
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis91.4%Reasoning78.7%MaxClaude Fable 5.1
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis59.1%Reasoning41.0%MaxClaude Fable 5.1
Terminal-Bench 4.0Terminal-Bench (Laude Institute)57.9%54.1%–61.6%Claude Code · Max—Only one result

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813: common questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?

Claude Fable 5.1 ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 24 October 2026: #3 against #31. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals do not overlap, but the aggregate Index does not predict performance on every task; compare the relevant benchmark configurations before choosing.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?

DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 is cheaper on output tokens: $1.98/1M against $50.00/1M. Input tokens are $10.00/1M for Claude Fable 5.1 and $0.66/1M for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $45.00 for Claude Fable 5.1 versus $2.31 for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813. DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 costs 94.9% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Fable 5.1 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?

Both publish a 1M-token context window. OpenRouter catalogue or provider-endpoint declaration. Limits can vary by provider and prompt length; a model-wide maximum has not been independently verified.

Which is better for coding, Claude Fable 5.1 or DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?

Arena coding: Claude Fable 5.1 1537, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 1505 — Claude Fable 5.1 leads. AA Terminal-Bench 2.1: Claude Fable 5.1 91.4%, DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 78.7% — Claude Fable 5.1 leads.

Are Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 open-weight models?

Claude Fable 5.1: No linked weights. DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813: Open weights. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence. A missing weight link does not identify every API or chat product that offers a model.

Where can I run Claude Fable 5.1 and DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813?

ModelCap currently lists 4 API providers for Claude Fable 5.1 and 21 for DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Claude Fable 5.1 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813 comparison?

Every figure and ModelCap Index position comes from the same published snapshot dated 24 October 2026. Publication and page updates happen separately; use the snapshot date shown on the page.

Explore further