Skip to main content

AnthropicMoonshot AILLM matchup

Claude Fable 5.2vs.Kimi K3.1 Pro

Which one is better?

Claude Fable 5.2 performs better than Kimi K3.1 Pro, but costs 4 times as much.

Fable 5.2 ahead
IntelligenceOverall index, 100 points = average
130.9

Claude Fable 5.2

Rank 1

112.6

Kimi K3.1 Pro

Rank 13

SpeedTokens per second
n/a

Claude Fable 5.2

56

Kimi K3.1 Pro

Kimi K3.1 Pro cheaper
Price$ per 1M tokens
$16

Claude Fable 5.2

$4

Kimi K3.1 Pro

Choose Claude Fable 5.2 for

KnowledgeMathematicsGeneralFinanceCodingAgentsLegal (not certain)Reasoning (not certain)

Choose Kimi K3.1 Pro for

No clear advantage

Where is the difference?

Strengths at a glance

Fable 5.2Kimi K3.1 ProMedian of all ranked models

11513515595CodingFable 5.2ReasoningslightlyFable 5.2MathematicsFable 5.2KnowledgeFable 5.2AgentsFable 5.2GeneralFable 5.2FinanceFable 5.2LegalslightlyFable 5.2
CodingFable 5.2 ahead
Fable 5.2131.6Rank 1
Kimi K3.1 Pro116.6Rank 10
Median of ranked models87.4

95 % range: Fable 5.2 122.0 to 141.1, Kimi K3.1 Pro 110.9 to 122.3.

AreaFable 5.2Kimi K3.1 Pro

The same values and verdicts as the bars below. In the close-up the net starts at 95 points, just below the weaker model's lowest value; the reference group average is 100. Not in the net because a model has no own value there or the data are too thin: Multimodal, Health.

Fable 5.2 is ahead in 6 of 9 areas, Kimi K3.1 Pro in none.

Fable 5.2 ahead: 6Fable 5.2 slightly ahead: 2too little data: 1

Areas in the overall index
KnowledgeFable 5.2 +30145.5 to 115.7
MathematicsFable 5.2 +23135.2 to 112.5
GeneralFable 5.2 +21132.8 to 111.6
CodingFable 5.2 +15131.6 to 116.6
AgentsFable 5.2 +12124.2 to 112.1
Reasoningleaning Fable 5.2not certain · 2 tests each
Multimodalonly Kimi K3.1 Pro has a score
Specialist fields
FinanceFable 5.2 +19123.5 to 104.9
Legalleaning Fable 5.2not certain · 3 and 2 tests

Bar length shows the gap in index points (full width 15 points, one standard deviation of the reference group). Solid means clearly ahead, hatched not certain yet, a thin grey bar level.

Claude Fable 5.2 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro at the same effort

Both models measured at the same reasoning efforts. This shows whether a lead comes from the model or only from more compute.

maxFable 5.2 ahead
15.7 points gap across 11 shared test series
Overall index (max vs. max)Fable 5.2 ahead
Fable 5.2 130.9 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro 112.6

The gap compares only the Artificial Analysis test series in which both models are measured at that effort. Tied below 3 points, ahead only beyond two standard errors.

Which model for which task?

Everyday tasks, translated from the area values above. Each row names the values it rests on.

Writing and debugging codeFable 5.2Coding 131.6 to 116.6
Maths and data analysisFable 5.2Mathematics 135.2 to 112.5, Reasoning 124.9 to 114.4
Facts and researchFable 5.2Knowledge 145.5 to 115.7
Agents and workflowsFable 5.2Agents 124.2 to 112.1
Many requests on a small budgetKimi K3.1 Pro$16 to $4 per 1M tokens
Finance, legal and medical textsFable 5.2Finance 123.5 to 104.9, Legal 120.9 to 107.2
Images, screenshots and PDFsopenMultimodal without a score for Fable 5.2

Claude Fable 5.2 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro in our own test

The same prompt for both models. We show the latest attempt without fixes; it does not count toward the overall index.

Pelican on a bicycle

Prompt

Generate an SVG of a pelican riding a bicycle

Task origin: Simon Willison

Claude Fable 5.2

Not tested yet

Kimi K3.1 Pro

Not tested yet

Claude Fable 5.2 and Kimi K3.1 Pro in the overall index

Every model with a place in the overall index, both models of this matchup highlighted. You can add or hide other models.

Overall index (Gradually Meta-Score v5)

20 of 94 models

4 models in this view are measured at a lower reasoning effort than max in the overall index. Dashed column: lower reasoning effort than the top.

Claude Fable 5.2max130.9
Gemini 4 Carbonhigh127.0
Claude Opus 5.5max125.6
Claude Fable 5.1max124.1
Claude Sonnet 5.5max121.8
Gemini 4 Argonhigh121.4
GPT-6 Astramax120.2
Muse Wonder Fullmax118.1
GPT-6.1 Solmax118.0
Claude Opus 5max117.4
Muse Wondermax113.3
Claude Fable 5max112.8
Kimi K3.1 Promax112.6
Muse Ember 1.0max110.4
GPT-6 Solmax109.1
GPT-5.6 Solmax109.1
Gemini 3.7 Flashhigh107.9
Muse Spark 1.3max107.3
Gemini 3.8 Flashhigh106.8
DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017max106.7

All data side by side

The better value is bold. For the overall index only when the gap is clear.

MetricClaude Fable 5.2Kimi K3.1 Pro
Intelligence
Overall indexpoints, 100 = reference group average, higher is better130.9112.6
RankRank 1 of 94Rank 13 of 94
Price per 1M tokens
Inputwhat you send$8$2
Outputwhat the model writes$40$10
Speed
Tokens per secondn/a56
Technical
Context windowhow much text the model reads at once1 M tokens≈ 1,500 A4 pages1.05 M tokens≈ 1,570 A4 pages
Knowledge cutoffJune 2026n/a
ReleasedNov 9, 2026Oct 23, 2026
AvailabilityActiveActive
Open weightsnon/a
  • Claude Fable 5.2, Batch pricing: $4 input and $20 output per million tokens, separate from standard API pricing. Source
  • Claude Fable 5.2, Fast pricing: $16 input and $80 output per million tokens. Fast is a separate serving mode. Source
  • Kimi K3.1 Pro, API price listed by Artificial Analysis: $2 input, $10 output, and $0.20 cached input per 1 million tokens. Kimi's official API publishes CNY rates separately. Source
  • Kimi K3.1 Pro, Official API pricing: K3.1 Pro: CNY 13 input, CNY 68 output, CNY 13 cache write, and CNY 1.30 cache hit per million tokens. Source
  • Kimi K3.1 Pro, Highspeed API pricing: CNY 26 input, CNY 136 output, CNY 26 cache write, and CNY 1.30 cache hit per million tokens. Source
  • Kimi K3.1 Pro, International API pricing in USD: The international Kimi platform lists $2 input, $10 output, $2 cache write and $0.20 cache hit per million tokens. Highspeed costs $4/$20/$4/$0.20. Checked October 29, 2026. Separately documented CNY tariffs remain separate observations. Source

Prices without caching or batch discounts · Page count as a rule of thumb from Artificial Analysis

Is there a better choice?

As cheap as Kimi K3.1 ProClaude Sonnet 5.5

Overall index 121.8, rank 5$2 input and $10 output per 1M tokens

Fable 5.2 vs. Claude Sonnet 5.5

Shared benchmarks

Single results from the same benchmark version, task and metric. A value is bold only with the same test setup and a clear gap.

No directly comparable result yet

No published benchmark for Claude Fable 5.2 and Kimi K3.1 Pro currently matches in version, task and metric. We therefore show no estimated or blended values.

More comparisons

Compare Claude Fable 5.2 and Kimi K3.1 Pro with the models people compare them with most often.

Compare another matchup

The most popular comparisons

  1. 1Kimi K3.1 Pro vs. GLM-5.3
  2. 2Claude Fable 5.2 vs. Kimi K3
  3. 3Claude Opus 5.5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  4. 4Gemini 3.8 Flash vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  5. 5Gemini 4 Argon vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  6. 6Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  7. 7GPT-6.1 Sol vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  8. 8Kimi K3.1 Pro vs. GLM-5.3-Flash
  9. 9Kimi K3.1 Pro vs. Qwen 3.8 27B
Show all 38 comparisons
  1. 10DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  2. 11GPT-6 Astra vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  3. 12Claude Opus 4.6 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  4. 13Grok 4.7 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  5. 14DeepSeek-V4-Pro vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  6. 15Claude Fable 5.2 vs. Claude Opus 5.5
  7. 16GPT-6.1 Terra vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  8. 17Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  9. 18DeepSeek-V4-Flash vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  10. 19Claude Haiku 5.5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  11. 20GPT-6 Sol vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  12. 21Claude Fable 5.1 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  13. 22Muse Wonder Full vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  14. 23Gemini 3.1 Pro Preview vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  15. 24Claude Opus 5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  16. 25DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  17. 26Kimi K3.1 Pro vs. Kimi K2.6
  18. 27Claude Fable 5.2 vs. Claude Haiku 5.5
  19. 28Kimi K3.1 Pro vs. GLM-5.2
  20. 29Kimi K3.1 Pro vs. Mistral Large 4
  21. 30Grok 4.5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  22. 31Kimi K3.1 Pro vs. Qwen 3.8 Max 0902
  23. 32Claude Sonnet 5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  24. 33Claude Opus 4.5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  25. 34GPT-5.6 Sol vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  26. 35Claude Opus 4.8 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  27. 36Kimi K3.1 Pro vs. GLM-5.1
  28. 37Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro
  29. 38Claude Fable 5 vs. Kimi K3.1 Pro