Model Comparison
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback)
vs. Kimi K2.6
Comparing 2 AI models · 7 benchmarks · Anthropic, MoonshotAI
Recommended Pick
An Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) 11 metric wins Strongest on: Throughput, Latency, Reasoning
Best Value
Kimi K2.6
100.0 value score
60.3 reasoning / $1.71/1M
Lowest Price
Kimi K2.6
$0.95/1M input price
Best Reasoning
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback)
70.3 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
Kimi K2.6 has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Price gap
Kimi K2.6 is 10.5x cheaper on input tokens than Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback).
Speed gap
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) generates about 1.7x as many tokens per second as Kimi K2.6.
Reasoning gap
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) leads Kimi K2.6 by 10.0 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) leads Kimi K2.6 by 14.9 points on 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
—
Kimi K2.6
MoonshotAI
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) | Mo Kimi K2.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $10.00/1M | $0.95/1M |
| Output Cost | $50.00/1M | $4.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $20.00/1M | $1.71/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | MoonshotAI |
| Release Date | Jun 9, 2026 | Apr 20, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 71.4 tok/s | 41.3 tok/s |
| TTFT | 66092ms | 1281ms |
| Latency | 66092ms | 109123ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 10.0 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 70.3 | 60.3 |
| Intelligence | 64.9 | 53.9 |
| Coding | 62.0 | 47.1 |
| Standard Benchmarks | ||
| GPQA | 92.6% | 91.1% |
| HLE | 53.3% | 35.9% |
| SciCode | 60.2% | 53.5% |
| LCR | 70.0% | 69.7% |
| IFBench | 63.5% | 76.0% |
| TAU-bench v2 | 98.5% | 95.9% |
| TerminalBench Hard | 62.9% | 43.9% |
Key Takeaways
Kimi K2.6 offers the best value at $0.95/1M, making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
Claude Fable 5 (Adaptive Reasoning, Max Effort, Opus 4.8 Fallback) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 70.3 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)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
- Code generation
- Software development
Kimi K2.6
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
