Roboflow

Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash

Compare Claude Fable 5 and Gemini 3.6 Flash side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Classification, OCR, Open Prompt, and Object Detection.

Compare Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.6 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
Run to compare this model.
GoogleGemini 3.6 Flash
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash on Vision Evals

Gemini 3.6 Flash scores higher on 3 of the five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Counting, where Gemini 3.6 Flash leads 80.2% to 63.5%.

Overall, Claude Fable 5 averages 71.7% (#19 of 63) against 77.1% (#11 of 63) for Gemini 3.6 Flash.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is cheaper ($0.0033 vs $0.039 per sample), while Claude Fable 5 is faster (9.5s vs 10.4s per sample).

Claude Fable 5Gemini 3.6 Flash

Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash Comparison Table

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

PropertyClaude Fable 5Gemini 3.6 Flash
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJun 2026Jul 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$0.750
Output $/1M$50.00$3.75
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Video ClassificationNot listedSupported
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
71.7%
77.1%
Avg cost / sample$0.039$0.0033
Avg speed / sample9.54s10.43s
By task
Object Detection (low)
56.4%
$0.059
57.1%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.9 to 59.4
$0.0041
Object Detection (high)–
70.7%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.3 to 71.2
$0.0093
Counting (low)
63.5%
$0.017
80.2%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 82.4
$0.0034
Counting (high)–
79.3%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 77.0 to 82.4
$0.0089
Identification (low)
100.0%
$0.014
99.0%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 96.9 to 100.0
$0.0015
Identification (high)–
100.0%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 100.0 to 100.0
$0.0033
OCR (low)
72.3%
$0.041
71.8%
$0.0030
by category
Single value
70.9%
Transcription
90.2%
Structured JSON
85.7%
Text localization
31.6%
Single value
68.3%
Transcription
89.4%
Structured JSON
82.9%
Text localization
42.5%
OCR (high)
74.2%
$0.075
77.4%
$0.014
by category
Single value
72.2%
Transcription
87.7%
Structured JSON
89.2%
Text localization
33.3%
Single value
68.7%
Transcription
90.3%
Structured JSON
89.3%
Text localization
62.1%
Reasoning (low)
66.2%
$0.018
77.7%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.2 to 80.1
$0.0031
Reasoning (high)
66.2%
$0.024
81.0%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 79.5 to 83.4
$0.0091

Claude Fable 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash: Overview

Claude Fable 5

Claude Fable 5 is Anthropic's first generally available Mythos-class large language model, released on June 9, 2026. It is built for long-horizon, asynchronous, and agentic tasks that prior Claude generations could not sustain, including multi-day autonomous coding sessions, complex knowledge work, and document-heavy analysis. The model supports a 1 million token context window with up to 128,000 output tokens per request and uses adaptive thinking as its sole reasoning mode, where the effort level is adjustable but raw chain-of-thought is never returned. Vision capabilities allow the model to parse diagrams, charts, and tables embedded in files and PDFs, and to use visual feedback to evaluate its own coding outputs against design goals. On benchmarks such as SWE-Bench Pro, the model scores 80.3% compared to 69.2% for Claude Opus 4.8, and it leads on CursorBench 3.1 for autonomous coding workflows.

Claude Fable 5 shares the same underlying model weights as Claude Mythos 5, but is deployed with safety classifiers that automatically reroute queries in high-risk domains — including cybersecurity, biology, and chemistry — to Claude Opus 4.8. These classifiers trigger in fewer than 5% of sessions on average. As a designated Covered Model, all traffic is subject to mandatory 30-day data retention to support safety monitoring. The model is available via the Claude API, Amazon Bedrock, Vertex AI, and Microsoft Foundry. Anthropic has not publicly disclosed parameter count, architecture details, or training data composition for this model.

Gemini 3.6 Flash

Gemini 3.6 Flash is a multimodal language model from Google DeepMind, positioned as the workhorse tier in the Gemini 3.x family. It accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF inputs with a 1 million token context window and produces up to 64,000 output tokens. The model builds directly on Gemini 3.5 Flash, incorporating developer and customer feedback to improve token efficiency, coding quality, and knowledge work performance. According to the Artificial Analysis Index, it consumes 17% fewer output tokens than its predecessor, and on some benchmarks such as DeepSWE, token reduction reaches up to 65%. It supports function calling, structured output, search as a tool, and code execution, and includes computer use as a built-in capability in the Gemini API and Gemini Enterprise.

On coding benchmarks, Gemini 3.6 Flash scores 49% on DeepSWE versus 37% for 3.5 Flash, and 63.9% on MLE Bench versus 49.7%. Computer use performance on OSWorld-Verified improves from 78.4% to 83%, and knowledge work scores on GDPval-AA v2 rise from 1349 to 1421. The model carries a knowledge cutoff of March 2026 and ships with enhanced Frontier Safety safeguards covering chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and cyber offense domains, with training to minimize refusals for beneficial uses. It is a proprietary, closed-weights model available in preview through the Gemini API via Google AI Studio, Android Studio, Google Antigravity, Gemini Enterprise, and the Gemini app.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Gemini 3.6 Flash performed better. It scores higher on 3 of the five vision tasks and averages 77.1% (#11 of 63) against 71.7% (#19 of 63) for Claude Fable 5. 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 3.6 Flash leads with 80.2% against 63.5%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Gemini 3.6 Flash is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0033 per sample against $0.039. Claude Fable 5 is priced at $10.00 per 1M input tokens and $50.00 per 1M output; Gemini 3.6 Flash is priced at $0.75 per 1M input tokens and $3.75 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Fable 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 9.5s per inference against 10.4s. 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 image captioning and image classification in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.