claude-fable-5-1
Checking current pricing…
Chat comparison
claude-fable-5-1vsglm-5.2
Compare the things that matter before you build: current price, capabilities, and latest aggregated LLM7 statistics.
Current pricing
See the cost difference clearly
glm-5.2
Checking current pricing…
What's different
Only capabilities that differ between these models are listed. Green highlights the broader supported option or larger context window.
Context window
claude-fable-5-1Better fit
1,000,000 tokens
glm-5.2
976,000 tokens
Input formats
claude-fable-5-1
text, image
glm-5.2
text
Vision
claude-fable-5-1Better fit
Supported
glm-5.2
Not supported
Capability scores
AI-estimated ratings on 30 criteria from head-to-head comparisons against 86 other text models in the LLM7 catalog, judged by TypeSafe Jev from public information (2026-10-20). Each score is the win rate against the field, relative to the strongest model for that criterion (100%). Not a benchmark.
Below 50%50–79%80–94%95%+
claude-fable-5-1 · leads in 27
93%
Strong
glm-5.2 · leads in 2
56%
Moderate
Knowledge & reasoning
General knowledge
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.250%Logical reasoning
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.257%Mathematics
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.262%Scientific and technical depth
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.256%Planning and task decomposition
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.257%
Coding & tools
Code generation
claude-fable-5-1Leads89%glm-5.247%Debugging and code review
claude-fable-5-1Leads99%glm-5.258%Agentic coding
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.261%Tool and function calling
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.255%SQL and query writing
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.263%
Writing & language
Creative writing
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.244%Professional writing
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.251%Conversational quality
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.249%Multilingual ability
claude-fable-5-1Leads86%glm-5.284%Translation
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.261%Summarization
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.257%
Data & professional work
Data analysis
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.261%Professional domains
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.253%Information extraction
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.261%Classification and labeling
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.261%Long-context handling
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.267%
Reliability & control
Instruction following
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.253%Structured output
claude-fable-5-1Leads98%glm-5.260%Factual accuracy
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.250%Safety and alignment
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.245%Steerability
claude-fable-5-1Leads100%glm-5.249%Output consistency
claude-fable-5-1Leads83%glm-5.260%
Speed, cost & vision
Response speed
claude-fable-5-110%glm-5.2Leads37%Cost efficiency
claude-fable-5-116%glm-5.2Leads43%Image understanding
claude-fable-5-1100%glm-5.2No image input
Latest LLM7 statistics
Recent aggregated percentages and response-time metrics from LLM7, not a global model benchmark or traffic disclosure.
Recent stability
claude-fable-5-1
94.82%
glm-5.2
99.94%
Average response time
claude-fable-5-1
6,647.67 ms
glm-5.2
2,766.68 ms
P95 API latency
claude-fable-5-1
30,000 ms
glm-5.2
10,000 ms
Side-by-side trends
Shared charts make the observed differences easier to read. Metrics without enough history stay hidden.
Request success rate
Both models on the same scale
claude-fable-5-1: 87.5%glm-5.2: 100%
Average API latency
Both models on the same scale
claude-fable-5-1: 3,224 msglm-5.2: 666 ms
P95 API latency
Both models on the same scale
claude-fable-5-1: 10,000 msglm-5.2: 5,000 ms
Estimate your workload
Published rates are loaded from the pricing API; per-request quotes are billed from actual provider usage.
Checking current pricing…
Checking current pricing…
Quick take
- claude-fable-5-1 has a larger context window.
- claude-fable-5-1 supports image input while the other model does not.
- glm-5.2 recorded higher recent LLM7 stability during this period.
- glm-5.2 recorded a lower observed p95 API latency on LLM7 during this period.