Claude Fable 5.2 vs Gemini 4 Carbon
How does Claude Fable 5.2 (Anthropic) compare against Gemini 4 Carbon (Google)? Side-by-side scores, capability ratings and pricing, plus a clear verdict.
🏆 Quick verdict
Claude Fable 5.2 comes out ahead with an AIVerso score of 99 vs 98 and an aggregate capability rating of 662 vs 653 across 7 categories. Gemini 4 Carbon still leads on Knowledge. Gemini 4 Carbon wins on price — lower API price ($2/$10 per 1M tokens (API, until Nov 30) vs $8/$40 per 1M tokens).
Overall winner
Claude Fable 5.2
by Anthropic
Score: 99/100
Price$8/$40 per 1M tokens
Pricing detailsAPI $8/$40 per 1M tokens (cache reads $0.20) · Fast mode $16/$80 per 1M · Claude Pro $20/mo (Fable up to 50% of weekly usage) · Max, Team & Enterprise plans
Context window1M
Free tierNo
API accessYes
Open sourceNo
BenchmarksAA Intelligence Index v5: 65
Headline facts#1 on the AA Intelligence Index 65 · Anthropic’s new top model (Nov 9) · FrontierSWE v2 69.9% · Terminal-Bench-Science 74.6% · up to 30% faster than Fable 5.1 · $8/$40 per 1M
🔗 Try Claude Fable 5.2 →
Full Claude Fable 5.2 profile →
Gemini 4 Carbon
by Google
Score: 98/100
Price$2/$10 per 1M tokens (API, until Nov 30)
Pricing detailsAPI $2/$10 per 1M until Nov 30, 2026, then $4/$20 · Batch $1/$5 per 1M · Gemini app with Google AI Ultra
Context window1M
Free tierNo
API accessYes
Open sourceNo
BenchmarksAA Intelligence Index v5: 60
Headline factsGoogle’s strongest model (generally available Nov 10) · AA Intelligence Index 60 · #1 on CursorBench 4.0, WANDR and AutomationBench (per Google) · thinks longer than Argon · API $2/$10 per 1M until Nov 30 · 1M context
Try Gemini 4 Carbon →
Full Gemini 4 Carbon profile → 🔗 Affiliate link — we may earn a commission if you sign up, at no extra cost to you.
📊 Capability ratings
AIVerso capability ratings (0–100) per category — an editorial summary informed by public benchmark results. Higher is better.
Category
Claude Fable 5.2
Gemini 4 Carbon
Math & Logice.g. AIME, MATH-500
96
92
Programminge.g. SWE-bench, LiveCodeBench
95
91
Reasoninge.g. GPQA, ARC
94
94
Knowledgee.g. MMLU-Pro
91
94
Long Contexte.g. MRCR, needle tests
96
96
Instruction Followinge.g. IFEval
95
93
Agent Capabilitye.g. Terminal-Bench, tool use
95
93
Why Claude Fable 5.2
Higher overall score (99 vs 98)
Leads on Math & Logic (96 vs 92)
Leads on Programming (95 vs 91)
Leads on Instruction Following (95 vs 93)
Leads on Agent Capability (95 vs 93)
#1 on the AA Intelligence Index 65
Anthropic’s new top model (Nov 9)
Why Gemini 4 Carbon
Lower API price ($2/$10 per 1M tokens (API, until Nov 30) vs $8/$40 per 1M tokens)
Leads on Knowledge (94 vs 91)
Google’s strongest model (generally available Nov 10)
AA Intelligence Index 60
Open this comparison in the live tool →
❓ Frequently Asked Questions
Which is better: Claude Fable 5.2 or Gemini 4 Carbon?
Claude Fable 5.2 has the higher AIVerso score (99 vs 98). The better choice still depends on your use case — Gemini 4 Carbon leads on Knowledge.
How much does Claude Fable 5.2 cost compared to Gemini 4 Carbon?
Claude Fable 5.2: $8/$40 per 1M tokens (API $8/$40 per 1M tokens (cache reads $0.20) · Fast mode $16/$80 per 1M · Claude Pro $20/mo (Fable up to 50% of weekly usage) · Max, Team & Enterprise plans). Gemini 4 Carbon: $2/$10 per 1M tokens (API, until Nov 30) (API $2/$10 per 1M until Nov 30, 2026, then $4/$20 · Batch $1/$5 per 1M · Gemini app with Google AI Ultra). Neither has a free tier.
What context window does each support?
Claude Fable 5.2: 1M tokens. Gemini 4 Carbon: 1M tokens. The context window determines how much text, code or chat history a model can process at once.
Are Claude Fable 5.2 and Gemini 4 Carbon open source?
Claude Fable 5.2 is a closed, proprietary model. Gemini 4 Carbon is a closed, proprietary model.
How we compare: Scores and capability ratings are based on public benchmarks and provider documentation — not on commission rates. Last updated: November 11, 2026.