Claude Fable 5 vs Gemma 4 31B

Compare Claude Fable 5 and Gemma 4 31B 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 Gemma 4 31B 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

Claude Fable 5 can't be run right now. See its model page for details.

GoogleGemma 4 31B
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Claude Fable 5 vs Gemma 4 31B: 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.

Gemma 4 31B

Gemma 4 31B is the largest dense model in Google's Gemma 4 family, built from the same research as Gemini 3 and released as open weights under the Apache 2.0 license. It supports a 256K token context window with text and image input, configurable thinking mode for step-by-step reasoning, and multilingual support across 140+ languages. The unquantized model fits on a single 80GB GPU.

For vision tasks, Gemma 4 31B supports image understanding with variable aspect ratios and resolutions, and can output structured bounding boxes for UI element detection, making it useful for document parsing and UI understanding. Compared to Gemma 3, it delivers stronger reasoning and multimodal performance. It is part of a four-size family alongside the 26B A4B MoE variant and two on-device models (E2B, E4B), with the 31B dense variant optimized for output quality and fine-tuning over inference speed.

Claude Fable 5 vs Gemma 4 31B Comparison Table

PropertyClaude Fable 5Gemma 4 31B
OrganizationAnthropicGoogle
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJun 2026Apr 2026
Context Window1.0M256K
Parameters31B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$10.00$0.120
Output $/1M$50.00$0.350
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
classificationDemo
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Chart Question Answering
Document Question Answering
Model Features
Multimodal Vision
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Vision Evalspass/fail results · 67 prompts
Score key:≥75%40–74%<40%
Overall Score
74.63%
67.16%
Avg Response Time16.44s34.59s
Median input tokensincl. image tokens294
Median output tokens169
Est. cost / taskon this benchmark$0.0001
Defect Detection
73.3%(11/15)
80%(12/15)
Document Understanding
77.8%(7/9)
88.9%(8/9)
Object Counting
30%(3/10)
10%(1/10)
Object Understanding
100%(14/14)
71.4%(10/14)
Spatial Understanding
78.9%(15/19)
73.7%(14/19)

Output tokens (incl. reasoning) and est. cost / task are measured on this benchmark from a single low-temperature run, and shown only for models whose run covered at least 90% of prompts. Methodology