claude-fable-5 vs kimi-k3-256k
Each agent graded on the same private suites, running headless through its own tools. Advantages are oriented so a win is a win, whichever way the metric runs.
| Dimension | claude-fable-5 | kimi-k3-256k | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 60% | 57% | +3% (claude-fable-5 leads) |
| Median task time | 3m 12s | 3m 3s | 10s faster (kimi-k3-256k leads) |
| Approx. task cost | $0.031 / task | $0.018 / task | $0.013 / task lower (kimi-k3-256k leads) |
claude-fable-5: 34.0% of Claude Max 20x (34.0% / 5h, 5.0% / 1w) per run. kimi-k3-256k: 99.0% of Kimi Allegretto (99.0% / 5h, 20.0% / 1w) per run. Each figure is a share of that agent's own plan, so there is no delta to draw.
Work per window: claude-fable-5 430 vs kimi-k3-256k 148 suite runs per month (claude-fable-5 leads); per plan-dollar: 2.15 vs 3.78 (kimi-k3-256k leads). Work figures compare outputs, so unlike quota shares they are comparable across plans.
| Dimension | claude-fable-5 | kimi-k3-256k | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 64% | 51% | +13% (claude-fable-5 leads) |
| Median task time | 5m 54s | 5m 16s | 38s faster (kimi-k3-256k leads) |
| Approx. task cost | $0.041 / task | $0.034 / task | $0.007 / task lower (kimi-k3-256k leads) |
claude-fable-5: 12.0% of Claude Max 20x (12.0% / 5h, 1.0% / 1w) per run. kimi-k3-256k: 51.0% of Kimi Allegretto (51.0% / 5h, 10.0% / 1w) per run. Each figure is a share of that agent's own plan, so there is no delta to draw.
Work per window: claude-fable-5 1218 vs kimi-k3-256k 286 suite runs per month (claude-fable-5 leads); per plan-dollar: 6.09 vs 7.35 (kimi-k3-256k leads). Work figures compare outputs, so unlike quota shares they are comparable across plans.
| Dimension | claude-fable-5 | kimi-k3-256k | Advantage |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | 69% | 38% | +31% (claude-fable-5 leads) |
| Median task time | 5m 25s | 6m 37s | 1m 12s faster (claude-fable-5 leads) |
| Approx. task cost | $0.038 / task | $0.027 / task | $0.011 / task lower (kimi-k3-256k leads) |
claude-fable-5: 2.8% of Claude Max 20x (2.8% / 5h, 0.6% / 1w) per good solve. kimi-k3-256k: 10.2% of Kimi Allegretto (10.2% / 5h, 2.0% / 1w) per good solve. Each figure is a share of that agent's own plan, so there is no delta to draw.
Work per window: claude-fable-5 5218 vs kimi-k3-256k 1432 good solves per month (claude-fable-5 leads); per plan-dollar: 26.09 vs 36.73 (kimi-k3-256k leads). Work figures compare outputs, so unlike quota shares they are comparable across plans.
Grades and deltas are comparable only within a suite version. See methodology.
Frequently asked questions
Which is better for coding, claude-fable-5 or kimi-k3-256k?
claude-fable-5 clears higher: tier 4 of 5 versus tier 2 for kimi-k3-256k on real-world@v3, our private suite of real-world coding problems. Latest measurement 2026-08-17.
Which gives more work per dollar, claude-fable-5 or kimi-k3-256k?
kimi-k3-256k delivers more benchmark work per subscription dollar: 3.78 suite runs per plan-dollar versus 2.15 for claude-fable-5 (at $39/month priced 2026-07-20, and $200/month priced 2026-08-05). Work figures compare outputs, so unlike raw quota shares they are comparable across plans.
How much do claude-fable-5 and kimi-k3-256k cost?
claude-fable-5 runs on Claude Max 20x at $200/month (public price as of 2026-08-05). kimi-k3-256k runs on Kimi Allegretto at $39/month (public price as of 2026-07-20).