Claude Fable 5 is a Mythos-class model from Anthropic, built for autonomous knowledge work and coding. It supports text, image, and file inputs with text output, with reasoning support and...
Best vision model APIs for image understanding
Compare vision model APIs for screenshots, documents, product images, and support tickets, with price and capability labels.
Para que sirve esta lista corta?: Vision models
Vision APIs are useful for screenshots, receipts, product photos, and ticket attachments. What matters is whether the model accepts the image type you have, whether you need JSON out, and how wrong answers look on your own samples. Price second. This page is a small set of vision-capable candidates so you can A/B a few instead of the whole catalog.
Base de la fuente: NextModel capability mapping and OpenRouter input-modality metadata when available. · Actualizado 2026-07-01
Fit score
Candidatos recomendados vision models
Empieza con la lista corta, prueba prompts reales y compara el costo mensual antes del routing en produccion.
Claude Haiku 4.5 is Anthropic’s fastest and most efficient model, delivering near-frontier intelligence at a fraction of the cost and latency of larger Claude models. Matching Claude Sonnet 4’s performance...
Claude Opus 4.5 is Anthropic’s frontier reasoning model optimized for complex software engineering, agentic workflows, and long-horizon computer use. It offers strong multimodal capabilities, competitive performance across real-world coding and...
Opus 4.6 is Anthropic’s strongest model for coding and long-running professional tasks. It is built for agents that operate across entire workflows rather than single prompts, making it especially effective...
Tabla comparativa
Compara la lista por precio, proveedor, contexto, capacidades y fuente.
Usa esta vista para reducir una lista de produccion, construir una politica de respaldo o comparar la economia de los modelos.
| Model | Provider | Input | Output | Context | Capabilities | Best for | Latency | Status | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Anthropic: Claude Fable 5anthropic/claude-fable-5 | Anthropic | $1.45 / 1M tokens | $7.23 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| Anthropic: Claude Haiku 4.5anthropic/claude-haiku-4.5 | Anthropic | $0.145 / 1M tokens | $0.723 / 1M tokens | 200k | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.5anthropic/claude-opus-4.5 | Anthropic | $0.723 / 1M tokens | $3.62 / 1M tokens | 200k | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.6anthropic/claude-opus-4.6 | Anthropic | $0.723 / 1M tokens | $3.62 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.7anthropic/claude-opus-4.7 | Anthropic | $0.723 / 1M tokens | $3.62 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| Anthropic: Claude Opus 4.8anthropic/claude-opus-4.8 | Anthropic | $0.723 / 1M tokens | $3.62 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| Claude Opus 5anthropic/claude-opus-5 | Anthropic | $0.723 / 1M tokens | $3.62 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
| Anthropic: Claude Sonnet 4.5anthropic/claude-sonnet-4.5 | Anthropic | $0.434 / 1M tokens | $2.17 / 1M tokens | 1M | StreamingTool callingJSON modeVision | image understanding, multimodal chat | 1000-3000ms | Catalog | Platform curated |
FAQ
Vision models FAQ
What should I compare before choosing a vision model API?
Image input support, JSON mode if you need it, latency, output cost, and quality on your real images. Synthetic benchmarks lie more often than people admit.
Can low-cost models handle vision tasks?
Sometimes, for light work. Dense documents and high-accuracy extraction usually need a stronger model and a real eval set.
Rankings