SmophyAI

Published daily · Next update 02:00 UTC

Real data comparison

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch)

On quality, Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) leads (53.4 vs 39.4). On price, Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch) is cheaper ($1.50 vs $20.00 per 1M). In real production usage, Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch) is used more (rank #13 vs #60 of 325).

  • Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch)
  • Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch)
Quality (Intelligence Index)53.4 / 39.4
Price ($/1M blended)$20.00 / $1.50
Average usage share0.32% / 2.10%
Best provider uptime100.0% / 100.0%
Coding index81.6 / 76.1
Agentic index58 / 36.4
Context window1,000,000 / 1,048,576
Quality per dollar2.7 pts/$ / 26.3 pts/$

Usage share over time

6.90%5.18%3.45%1.73%0.00%Share of usageAug 14Aug 26Sep 8
  • Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch)
  • Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch)

Frequently asked questions

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch): which is better quality?

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) scores higher on Artificial Analysis's Intelligence Index (53.4 vs 39.4).

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch): which is cheaper?

Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch) is cheaper at $1.50/1M vs $20.00/1M.

Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 (batch) vs Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch): which is used more?

Google: Gemini 3.7 Flash (batch) has higher real OpenRouter usage share (rank #13 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.