Model Comparison
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
vs. GPT-6 Astra (xhigh)
Comparing 2 AI models · 0 benchmarks · Anthropic, OpenAI
Recommended Pick
AnClaude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)4 metric winsStrongest on: Throughput, TTFT, Latency
Best Value
GPT-6 Astra (xhigh)
100.0 value score
54.3 reasoning / $20.00/1M
Lowest Price
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
$10.00/1M input price
Best Reasoning
GPT-6 Astra (xhigh)
54.3 reasoning score
Blends available reasoning benchmarks
Best for Coding
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
80.7 coding index
Differences That Matter
Best value
GPT-6 Astra (xhigh) has the strongest quality-to-price mix at 100.0 out of 100 value points.
Speed gap
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) generates about 1.2x as many tokens per second as GPT-6 Astra (xhigh).
Reasoning gap
GPT-6 Astra (xhigh) leads Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) by 0.5 points on reasoning.
Coding gap
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) leads GPT-6 Astra (xhigh) by 4.8 points on coding.
Top-pick rationale
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) wins 4 measurable categories, including Throughput, TTFT, Latency, Coding.
Response Face-Off
Run one prompt through the selected models and compare response quality with live speed and cost context.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
Anthropic
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
GPT-6 Astra (xhigh)
OpenAI
TTFT
—
Time
—
tok/s
—
Tokens
—
Cost
—
Which answer was more useful?
Secure AI Chat made in Europe
Processing terms vary by selected model. Review the current Privacy Policy and DPA before using sensitive data.
OpenAI-compatible inference
Choose from the current model catalog. Processing terms vary by selected model and service.
Full Comparison
| Metric | Top Pick An Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) | Op GPT-6 Astra (xhigh) |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input Cost | $10.00/1M | $10.00/1M |
| Output Cost | $50.00/1M | $50.00/1M |
| Blended (3:1) | $20.00/1M | $20.00/1M |
| Specifications | ||
| Organization | Anthropic | OpenAI |
| Release Date | Sep 1, 2026 | Sep 3, 2026 |
| Performance & Speed | ||
| Throughput | 68.9 tok/s | 56.8 tok/s |
| TTFT | 102620ms | 119440ms |
| Latency | 102620ms | 119440ms |
| Composite Indices | ||
| Value Score | 99.1 | 100.0 |
| Reasoning Score | 53.8 | 54.3 |
| Intelligence | 53.8 | 54.3 |
| Coding | 80.7 | 75.9 |
Key Takeaways
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) offers the best value at $10.00/1M,making it ideal for high-volume applications and cost-conscious projects.
GPT-6 Astra (xhigh) has the strongest reasoning profile with a 54.3 reasoning score,combining the available reasoning-heavy benchmarks.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback) reaches a 80.7 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 5.1 (Adaptive Reasoning, Xhigh Effort, Default Fallback)
- Cost-sensitive applications
- High-volume processing
- Code generation
- Software development
GPT-6 Astra (xhigh)
- Complex reasoning tasks
- Research & analysis
