Model comparison
Claude Fable 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol
Head-to-head evidence from 8 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Fable 5 #2; GPT-5.6 Sol unranked
Evidence parity. Claude Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol share 8 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 12 results are unique to Claude Fable 5; 35 to GPT-5.6 Sol.
Updated July 13, 2026- Shared results
- 8
- Claude Fable 5 only
- 12
- GPT-5.6 Sol only
- 35
- Comparable categories
- 5 / 8
Pick Claude Fable 5 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. GPT-5.6 Sol only becomes the better choice if knowledge is the priority or you want the cheaper token bill.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 8 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Claude Fable 5 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 91 to 86. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Claude Fable 5's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 85.6 against 64.6. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Pro, 80% to 64.6%. GPT-5.6 Sol does hit back in knowledge, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Claude Fable 5 is also the more expensive model on tokens at $10.00 input / $50.00 output per 1M tokens, versus $5.00 input / $30.00 output per 1M tokens for GPT-5.6 Sol. Claude Fable 5 gives you the larger context window at 1M+, compared with 1M for GPT-5.6 Sol.
Category breakdown
Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.
| Category | Claude Fable 5 | Δ | GPT-5.6 Sol |
|---|---|---|---|
| Knowledge | Claude Fable 568.6 | Margin→ 26.0 | GPT-5.6 Sol94.6 |
| Coding | Claude Fable 585.6 | Margin← 21.0 | GPT-5.6 Sol64.6 |
| Math | Claude Fable 597.6 | Margin← 10.1 | GPT-5.6 Sol87.5 |
| Multimodal | Claude Fable 592.9 | Margin← 9.9 | GPT-5.6 Sol83.0 |
| Agentic | Claude Fable 585.3 | Margin→ 6.7 | GPT-5.6 Sol92.0 |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 80%B 64.6%Winner: Claude Fable 5Δ 15.4SWE-bench Pro: Claude Fable 5 scored 80%; GPT-5.6 Sol scored 64.6%. Claude Fable 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
MMMU-Pro
MultimodalA 92.7%B 83%Winner: Claude Fable 5Δ 9.7MMMU-Pro: Claude Fable 5 scored 92.7%; GPT-5.6 Sol scored 83%. Claude Fable 5 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 84.3%B 91.9%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 7.6Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Fable 5 scored 84.3%; GPT-5.6 Sol scored 91.9%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
BrowseComp
AgenticA 86.9%B 92.2%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 5.3BrowseComp: Claude Fable 5 scored 86.9%; GPT-5.6 Sol scored 92.2%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
GPQA
KnowledgeA 94.5%B 94.6%Winner: GPT-5.6 SolΔ 0.1GPQA: Claude Fable 5 scored 94.5%; GPT-5.6 Sol scored 94.6%. GPT-5.6 Sol wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Claude Fable 5 | GPT-5.6 Sol | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Claude Fable 5$10 input / $50 output | GPT-5.6 Sol$5 input / $30 output | GPT-5.6 Sol has the lower combined listed price. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Claude Fable 5Not available | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Claude Fable 5Not available | GPT-5.6 SolNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Claude Fable 51M+ | GPT-5.6 Sol1M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticGPT-5.6 Sol wins14 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 84.3% | 91.9% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | 85% | — | Not comparable |
| BrowseCompSource | 86.9% | 92.2% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| GDPval-AASource | 1760 | 1748 | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 62.6% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 84.5% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 33.7% | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 58% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 54.0% | Not comparable |
| Tau2-TelecomSource | — | 85.1% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 62.4% | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 1495 | Not comparable |
| AA ITBenchSource | — | 56.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 33.0% | Not comparable |
CodingClaude Fable 5 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 95% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 80% | 64.6% | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| FrontierCodeSource | 53.5% | — | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 84.3% | 91.9% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| cursorBench31Source | 70.6% | — | Not comparable |
| cursorBench32Source | 70.5% | 67.2% | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| deepSweSource | — | 72.7% | Not comparable |
| FrontierCode 1.1 ExtendedSource | — | 60.6% | Not comparable |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 77.4% | Not comparable |
| Terminal-Bench HardSource | — | 65.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 56.1% | Not comparable |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | — | 88.0% | Not comparable |
Reasoning4 benchmarks
KnowledgeGPT-5.6 Sol wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 94.5% | 94.6% | GPT-5.6 Sol leads |
| HLESource | 64.5% | — | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 59% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 94.6% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | — | 60.5% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 33.1% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 58.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 94.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 47.2% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 21.7% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 58.5% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 88.8% | Not comparable |
MathClaude Fable 5 wins4 benchmarks
Multilingual1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE MultilingualSource | 87.3% | — | Not comparable |
MultimodalClaude Fable 5 wins7 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMMU-ProSource | 92.7% | 83% | Claude Fable 5 leads |
| SWE-bench MultimodalSource | 59% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXivSource | 93.2% | — | Not comparable |
| CharXiv w/o toolsSource | 86.1% | — | Not comparable |
| Blueprint-Bench 2Source | 38.6% | — | Not comparable |
| MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource | — | 84.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 83.4% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Claude Fable 5 | GPT-5.6 Sol | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 72.7% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (6)
Which is better, Claude Fable 5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Claude Fable 5 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 91 to 86. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Pro, where the scores are 80% and 64.6%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Fable 5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 94.6 versus 68.6. Inside this category, GPQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Claude Fable 5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Claude Fable 5 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 85.6 versus 64.6. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for math, Claude Fable 5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Claude Fable 5 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 97.6 versus 87.5. GPT-5.6 Sol stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Fable 5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
GPT-5.6 Sol has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 92 versus 85.3. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Fable 5 or GPT-5.6 Sol?
Claude Fable 5 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 83. Inside this category, MMMU-Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
The AI models change fast. We track them for you.
A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.
Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.