Model Comparison
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback)
vs. GPT-5.2 (xhigh)
Comparing 2 AI models · 10 benchmarks · Anthropic, OpenAI
Recommended Pick
An Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) 9 metric wins Strongest on: TTFT, Latency, Intelligence
Best Value
GPT-5.2 (xhigh)
100.0 value score
73.2 reasoning / $4.81/1M
Lowest Price
GPT-5.2 (xhigh)
$1.75/1M input price
Best Reasoning
GPT-5.2 (xhigh)
73.2 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback)
62.0 coding index
Composite Indices
Higher is better; speed and price are normalized
Standard Benchmarks
Only benchmarks with data are shown
Differences That Matter
Best value
GPT-5.2 (xhigh) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
GPT-5.2 (xhigh) is 5.7x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback).
Reasoning gap
GPT-5.2 (xhigh) leads Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) by 4.6 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) leads GPT-5.2 (xhigh) by 13.3 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) wins 9 measurable categories, including TTFT, Latency, Intelligence, Coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
GPT-5.2 (xhigh)
OpenAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick An Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) | Op GPT-5.2 (xhigh) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $10.00/1M | $1.75/1M |
| Output Cost | $50.00/1M | $14.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $20.00/1M | $4.81/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Release Date | Jun 9, 2026 | Dec 11, 2025 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | — | 76.9 tok/s |
| TTFT | — | 87860ms |
| Latency | — | 87860ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 22.6 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 68.6 | 73.2 |
| Intelligence | 59.9 | 42.2 |
| Coding | 62.0 | 48.7 |
| Math | — | 99.0 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 92.6% | 90.3% |
| MMLU Pro | — | 87.4% |
| HLE | 53.3% | 35.4% |
| LiveCodeBench | — | 88.9% |
| AIME 2025 | — | 99.0% |
| SciCode | 60.2% | 52.1% |
| LCR | 70.0% | 72.7% |
| IFBench | 63.5% | 75.4% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 98.5% | 84.8% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 62.9% | 47.0% |
Key Takeaways
GPT-5.2 (xhigh) offers the best value at $1.75/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
GPT-5.2 (xhigh) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 73.2 reasoning score, combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) reaches a 62.0 coding index, making it the top choice for software development and code generation tasks.
All models support context windows of ∞+ tokens, suitable for processing lengthy documents and maintaining extended conversations.
When to Choose Each Model
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback)
- Code generation
- Software development
GPT-5.2 (xhigh)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
