Compare Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic) and GPT-4o-mini (OpenAI) by price, context, capabilities, and latency.
Side by side
Compare price, provider, context, capabilities, latency, and source basis.
| Model | Provider | Input | Output | Context | Capabilities | Best for | Latency | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Fable 5.1anthropic/claude-fable-5.1 | Anthropic | $10 / 1M tokens | $50 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 0-0ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| GPT-4o-miniopenai/gpt-4o-mini | OpenAI | $0.15 / 1M tokens | $0.6 / 1M tokens | 128k | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1365-2808ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
FAQ
GPT-4o-mini is cheaper ($0.15 / 1M tokens input / $0.6 / 1M tokens output) vs Claude Fable 5.1 ($10 / 1M tokens input / $50 / 1M tokens output). Actual cost depends on your input/output token mix — estimate it with the pricing calculator.
Claude Fable 5.1 is larger (1M tokens) vs 128k tokens.
Both target Vision. Pick GPT-4o-mini to optimize cost, or Claude Fable 5.1 for the longer context window. Test both on real prompts before committing production traffic.