Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.1 Ultra

Head-to-head technical comparison of intelligence, capabilities, and API pricing.

Claude Fable 5.1
Anthropic
AI Mastery Index96.9
LMSYS Arena1504
Technical (MMLU-Pro)95.9%
Cost per 1M Tokens$10
Gemini 3.1 Ultra
Google
AI Mastery Index92.5
LMSYS Arena1480
Technical (MMLU-Pro)92.5%
Cost per 1M Tokens$20

Which should you use?

Claude Fable 5.1 leads on the composite index by 4.4 points (96.9 vs 92.5).

Cost is the sharper difference: Gemini 3.1 Ultra is 2x the input price of Claude Fable 5.1 ($20 against $10 per 1M), so at volume the choice is usually decided by budget rather than benchmarks.

Pick Claude Fable 5.1 when

  • Higher composite index — 96.9 against 92.5, a gap of 4.4 points.
  • Ahead on Arena Elo by 24 points (1504 vs 1480), which is outside the board's published confidence intervals.
  • Stronger on MMLU-Pro: 95.9% against 92.5%.
  • Cheaper input tokens — $10 against $20 per 1M, so Gemini 3.1 Ultra costs 2x as much to feed.
  • Better value per point of measured capability: $0.103 per index point against $0.216.

Pick Gemini 3.1 Ultra when

On these measures Gemini 3.1 Ultra does not lead Claude Fable 5.1 anywhere, so pick it only for reasons outside this table — an existing integration, a region, or a contract.

Value per point of measured capability, at list input pricing: Claude Fable 5.1 $0.103 · Gemini 3.1 Ultra $0.216 per index point. Run your own token mix through the token cost calculator — a comparison at list price ignores caching and batch discounts, which move real bills more than this gap does.

Our reporting on Anthropic and Google