Is Claude Fable 5.1 better than GPT-6 Astra?
Claude Fable 5.1 ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 24 October 2026: #3 against #13. 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 GPT-6 Astra?
Both list the same output price, $50.00/1M tokens, with input at $10.00/1M and $10.00/1M respectively. 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 $45.00 for GPT-6 Astra. The listed-rate totals are equal. 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 GPT-6 Astra?
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 GPT-6 Astra?
Arena coding: Claude Fable 5.1 1537, GPT-6 Astra 1543 — GPT-6 Astra leads. AA Terminal-Bench 2.1: Claude Fable 5.1 91.4%, GPT-6 Astra 88.4% — Claude Fable 5.1 leads. Terminal-Bench 4.0: Claude Fable 5.1 57.9%, GPT-6 Astra 58.2% — GPT-6 Astra leads.