Qwen3.8 Omni Flash is cheaper than Claude Fable 5.1 at $0.15/M vs $10/M input tokens.
Playable Mario level in one HTML file. The physics is the hard part.
Which answer wins?
Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, Claude Fable 5.1 has the edge: bigger model tier, major provider backing. Qwen3.8 Omni Flash costs 106x less per token.
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $10/M tokens | $0.15/M tokens |
| Output price | $50/M tokens | $0.47/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 1.0M tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Sep 2026 | Sep 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $100 | $1.50 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 6 Oct 2026.
Claude Fable 5.1 is developed by Anthropic while Qwen3.8 Omni Flash is developed by Qwen. Claude Fable 5.1 has a 1.0M token context window vs Qwen3.8 Omni Flash's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 4 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. Claude Fable 5.1 and Qwen3.8 Omni Flash each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 4 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10/M input tokens and Qwen3.8 Omni Flash costs $0.15/M input tokens. Qwen3.8 Omni Flash is $9.85/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Fable 5.1 and Qwen3.8 Omni Flash across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.