Roboflow

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash

Compare Claude Fable 5.1 and Gemini 3.5 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, OCR, Image Captioning, Open Prompt, and Classification.

Compare Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
AnthropicClaude Fable 5.1
Run to compare this model.
GoogleGemini 3.5 Flash
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.5 Flash scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Counting, where Gemini 3.5 Flash leads 80.6% to 69.4%.

Overall, Claude Fable 5.1 averages 74.7% (#14 of 63) against 81.8% (#4 of 63) for Gemini 3.5 Flash.

Gemini 3.5 Flash is cheaper ($0.012 vs $0.039 per sample), while Claude Fable 5.1 is faster (8.3s vs 11.5s per sample).

Claude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.5 Flash

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 19, 2026

PropertyClaude Fable 5.1Gemini 3.5 Flash
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026May 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$10.00$1.50
Output $/1M$50.00$9.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
74.7%
81.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.039$0.012
Avg speed / sample8.35s11.52s
By task
Object Detection (low)
61.4%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 61.0 to 62.0
$0.060
70.6%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 68.7 to 72.6
$0.016
Object Detection (high)
65.0%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.6 to 65.3
$0.078
69.8%
±1.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.5 to 71.1
$0.021
Counting (low)
69.4%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 66.2 to 71.6
$0.019
80.6%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.7 to 81.1
$0.0075
Counting (high)
73.0%
±4.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 67.6 to 77.0
$0.023
82.4%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.4 to 82.4
$0.017
Identification (low)
97.9%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.013
99.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0040
Identification (high)
96.9%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 100.0
$0.014
97.9%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0068
OCR (low)
72.9%
$0.039
76.7%
$0.013
by category
Single value
64.3%
Transcription
84.7%
Structured JSON
89.2%
Text localization
46.5%
Single value
71.7%
Transcription
90.0%
Structured JSON
86.8%
Text localization
56.2%
OCR (high)
75.3%
$0.051
75.5%
$0.031
by category
Single value
69.1%
Transcription
95.2%
Structured JSON
89.5%
Text localization
43.4%
Single value
69.6%
Transcription
85.4%
Structured JSON
88.1%
Text localization
53.3%
Reasoning (low)
72.0%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.9 to 73.5
$0.019
82.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.1 to 84.1
$0.0082
Reasoning (high)
73.1%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.5 to 75.5
$0.028
81.0%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.5 to 82.8
$0.018

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Gemini 3.5 Flash: Overview

Claude Fable 5.1

Claude Fable 5.1 is a proprietary multimodal model from Anthropic in the Mythos-class tier of the Claude 5 family, positioned above Claude Opus for demanding reasoning and long-horizon agentic work. It accepts text and images as input and returns text, with a one million token context window and a maximum output of 128 thousand tokens. Adaptive thinking is always on, and an effort parameter controls how much reasoning the model applies to a given request. Anthropic reports a reliable knowledge and training data cutoff of June 2026. Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1 share the same underlying model; the difference between them is the set of safety classifiers applied to dual-use cybersecurity and biology requests.

On the vision side, Anthropic documents improvements in reading dense charts, financial filings, and tables nested inside PDF documents, which extends the model toward document understanding, chart question answering, and spreadsheet and slide work. Reported evaluations cover agentic scientific research on Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1, agentic coding on Terminal-Bench 4.0, computer use on OSWorld 2.0, and multidisciplinary reasoning on Humanity's Last Exam. Model weights are not published.

Gemini 3.5 Flash

Gemini 3.5 Flash is a multimodal language model developed by Google DeepMind and released at Google I/O 2026. It is built on the Gemini 3 Flash reasoning foundation and introduces configurable thinking levels (minimal, low, medium, and high) that allow developers to tune the depth of internal reasoning before a response is generated. The model accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs and produces text output, with a 1 million token context window and up to 65,000 output tokens per request. It is natively multimodal, processing visual inputs alongside text to support tasks such as image captioning, classification, optical character recognition, object detection, and visual grounding, where the model references specific regions within an image or video frame.

Its vision capabilities extend to interpreting UI screenshots, diagrams, charts, and real-world scenes, as well as understanding video and live frame sequences for activity and scene recognition. The model supports combined tool use, including Google Search, URL context, code execution, and custom functions, within a single request, and it uses reasoning context from previous turns when thought signatures are present in the conversation history, enabling persistent multi-turn reasoning chains. Gemini 3.5 Flash carries a knowledge cutoff of January 2026 and is available via the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, Google Antigravity, and the Gemini Enterprise Agent Platform.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.5 Flash performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 81.8% (#4 of 63) against 74.7% (#14 of 63) for Claude Fable 5.1. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Counting benchmark at low effort, Gemini 3.5 Flash leads with 80.6% against 69.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Gemini 3.5 Flash is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.012 per sample against $0.039. Claude Fable 5.1 is priced at $10.00 per 1M input tokens and $50.00 per 1M output; Gemini 3.5 Flash is priced at $1.50 per 1M input tokens and $9.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Fable 5.1 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.3s per inference against 11.5s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for object detection and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.