SmophyAI

Published daily · Next update 02:00 UTC

Real data comparison

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423

On quality, Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) leads (53.4 vs 36.3). On price, DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 is cheaper ($0.87 vs $20.00 per 1M). In real production usage, DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 is used more (rank #10 vs #60 of 325).

  • Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch)
  • DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423
Quality (Intelligence Index)53.4 / 36.3
Price ($/1M blended)$20.00 / $0.87
Average usage share0.32% / 4.04%
Best provider uptime100.0% / 100.0%
Coding index81.6 / 68.8
Agentic index58 / 42.3
Context window1,000,000 / 1,048,576
Quality per dollar2.7 pts/$ / 41.8 pts/$

Usage share over time

7.35%5.51%3.68%1.84%0.00%Share of usageJul 5Aug 6Sep 8
  • Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch)
  • DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423

Frequently asked questions

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423: which is better quality?

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) scores higher on Artificial Analysis's Intelligence Index (53.4 vs 36.3).

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423: which is cheaper?

DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 is cheaper at $0.87/1M vs $20.00/1M.

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423: which is used more?

DeepSeek: DeepSeek V4 Pro 0423 has higher real OpenRouter usage share (rank #10 vs #60 of 325).

Source: OpenRouter (openrouter.ai/rankings), as of September 9, 2026.

Benchmark scores: Artificial Analysis (artificialanalysis.ai) via OpenRouter (openrouter.ai/rankings).

Methodology: www.smophy.ai/benchmark/methodology

Token counts originate from each provider's own tokenizer and are not directly comparable across providers.