Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark Open

Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic) and Muse Spark Open (Meta) 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 15 October 2026

As of 15 October 2026, Claude Fable 5.1 holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#4 vs #15); and Muse Spark Open is 11.8× cheaper per output token ($4.25/1M vs $50.00/1M).

Which should you choose?

Choose Claude Fable 5.1 if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #4 against #15 (85.6 vs 79.6 points).
  • AA Intelligence Index is your yardstick — 53.4 against 38.9.
  • AA Terminal-Bench 2.1 is your yardstick — 91.4% against 76.4%.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 59.1% against 43.9%.

Choose Muse Spark Open if…

  • API cost matters — $4.25/1M output tokens against $50.00/1M, about 11.8× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $1.25/1M against $10.00/1M.
  • you want the more recently listed model — Muse Spark Open was listed 15 October 2026, Claude Fable 5.1 1 September 2026.

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark Open: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Claude Fable 5.1 and Muse Spark Open
FieldClaude Fable 5.1AnthropicMuse Spark OpenMeta
ModelCap Index position#4#15
Index score85.679.6
EvidenceMeasuredEstimated
Input price / 1M tokens$10.00$1.25
Output price / 1M tokens$50.00$4.25
Context window1M tokens1M tokens
Declared route output cap128K944K
API providers listed44
Weight accessNo linked weightsGated access
Input modalitiesText, Image, FileText, Image, Video, File, Audio
First listed1 September 202615 October 2026
PublisherAnthropicMeta

Evidence: 4 public benchmark observations across 4 boards · publisher-corpus-prior over 213 held-out anchors (22%); launch card against 5 resolved peers on 11 rows (78%); exceeds every named peer on 3 of 11 rows; optimism haircut 0 from cross-lab-probe; shrunk 1 up toward the measured corpus. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark Open

Public benchmark boards where Claude Fable 5.1 or Muse Spark Open has a published result
BoardClaude Fable 5.1Muse Spark OpenLeads
Arena textArena (LMArena)15011494–1507Max—Only one result
Arena codingArena (LMArena)15351524–1547Max—Only one result
LMArena AgentLMArena14.1%12.1%–16.1%Max—Only one result
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize Foundation90.0%Max—Only one result
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis53.4Reasoning38.9X-HighClaude Fable 5.1
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Artificial Analysis91.4%Reasoning76.4%X-HighClaude Fable 5.1
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis59.1%Reasoning43.9%X-HighClaude 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 Muse Spark Open: common questions

Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than Muse Spark Open?

Claude Fable 5.1 ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 15 October 2026: #4 against #15. 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 overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is Claude Fable 5.1 cheaper than Muse Spark Open?

Muse Spark Open is cheaper on output tokens: $4.25/1M against $50.00/1M. Input tokens are $10.00/1M for Claude Fable 5.1 and $1.25/1M for Muse Spark Open. 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 $4.63 for Muse Spark Open. Muse Spark Open costs 89.7% 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 Muse Spark Open?

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 Muse Spark Open?

AA Terminal-Bench 2.1: Claude Fable 5.1 91.4%, Muse Spark Open 76.4% — Claude Fable 5.1 leads.

Are Claude Fable 5.1 and Muse Spark Open open-weight models?

Claude Fable 5.1: No linked weights. Muse Spark Open: Gated access. 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 Muse Spark Open?

ModelCap currently lists 4 API providers for Claude Fable 5.1 and 4 for Muse Spark Open, 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 Muse Spark Open comparison?

Every figure and ModelCap Index position comes from the same published snapshot dated 15 October 2026. Publication and page updates happen separately; use the snapshot date shown on the page.

Explore further