PomBench

Claude Fable 5.1 coding benchmark

Anthropic · API model claude-fable-5-1 · Results published 25 Oct 2026 · Benchmark v4

Compare Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5 ↗

How Claude Fable 5.1 performed

Claude Fable 5.1 by Anthropic took the PomBench AI coding benchmark: every model gets the same prompt and writes self-contained browser code for a twelve-second scene: a Pomeranian runs across a backyard, jumps a puddle, enters its doghouse, retrieves a bone and turns toward the viewer. The video above is an independent offline browser recording of the code Claude Fable 5.1 returned, captured at 960 × 540 and 30 fps, with no organizer edits to the code.

In this Claude Fable 5.1 coding test the model produced 120,293 output tokens, including provider-reported reasoning (rank 3 of 46 by output tokens), and the known API cost was $6.1168 (rank 45 of 45, cheapest first). Is Claude Fable 5.1 good at coding? One task cannot answer that on its own, so this LLM coding benchmark lets you watch the result instead of reading a score: check the gait, the puddle jump and reflection, the doorway occlusion and whether the bone stays in the dog's mouth.

Then compare Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5 and Claude Sonnet 5.5 below, or open the AI model comparison to play up to four models on one synchronized timeline.

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Opus 5.5, Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Gemini 3.8 Flash

Claude Fable 5.1 code

Claude Fable 5.1 wrote its own native browser animation code from the same prompt as every other model. One execution repair is available for empty, truncated or unexecutable code; the final response is kept, not a best-of selection.

Read the shared prompt · How the LLM benchmark works

Latest models tested