Claude Fable 5.1 vs Step 5 Preview
Anthropic · US | StepFun · China · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Fable 5.1 for terminal-bench-science agentic research (52.6%, more than double fable 5's 24.7%) or cursorbench 3.2 agentic coding (73.4%). Pick Step 5 Preview for sparse moe architecture — 600b total parameters, only 27b active per token — built for long-horizon agentic work across large codebases and documents or 1m-token context window (64k max output) at $1/$2.70 per million tokens, among the cheapest frontier-scale context windows available. On a tight budget at scale, Step 5 Preview is the value pick.
Claude Fable 5.1 (Anthropic, US) and Step 5 Preview (StepFun, China) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. Claude Fable 5.1 is anthropic's September 1, 2026 update to its Fable line for coding and knowledge work, keeping the 1M-token context of Fable 5 while cutting cache-read costs and roughly doubling agentic-research benchmark scores. Step 5 Preview is stepFun's September 20, 2026 flagship preview — a 600B-parameter sparse MoE model (27B active) with a 1M-token context window at $1/$2.70 per million tokens, open weights promised for mid-October. Their biggest split is price, and the breakdown below shows exactly how that plays out for your workload.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: Step 5 Preview is about 10× cheaper on input ($1/$2.7 per 1M tokens vs $10/$50 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
- ▸Context window: both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Tie on paper — test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
- ▸Recency: Step 5 Preview is the newer model by about 19 days (released September 20, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
- ▸Ecosystem: this is a US-vs-China matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Claude Fable 5.1 | Step 5 Preview |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic (US) | StepFun (China) |
| Released | September 1, 2026 | September 20, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $10/$50 per 1M tokens | $1/$2.7 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | No — API only |
| Modalities | text, image | text, image, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | Not published |
Who wins what
Terminal-Bench-Science agentic research (52.6%, more than double Fable 5's 24.7%)
Claude Fable 5.1
Step 5 Preview is comparatively weak here — stepCodeBench and DeepSWE figures are StepFun's own reported numbers, not yet independently reproduced at scale
CursorBench 3.2 agentic coding (73.4%)
Claude Fable 5.1
Step 5 Preview is comparatively weak here — trails closed frontier models on coding — 67.7% on DeepSWE v1.1 vs GPT-6 Astra's 74.1% and Claude Opus 5's 74.0%
Cache-read pricing cut to a quarter of other Claude models
Claude Fable 5.1
Claude Fable 5.1 lists cache-read pricing cut to a quarter of other Claude models among its strengths; Step 5 Preview does not.
Sparse MoE architecture — 600B total parameters, only 27B active per token — built for long-horizon agentic work across large codebases and documents
Step 5 Preview
StepFun's September 20, 2026 flagship preview — a 600B-parameter sparse MoE model (27B active) with a 1M-token context window at $1/$2.70 per million tokens, open weights promised for mid-October — and it runs cheaper at $1/$2.7 per 1M tokens.
1M-token context window (64K max output) at $1/$2.70 per million tokens, among the cheapest frontier-scale context windows available
Step 5 Preview
At $1/$2.7 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Fable 5.1 ($10/$50 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
67.7% on DeepSWE v1.1, ahead of open-weight rivals Kimi K3 (67.5%) and GLM-5.3 (66.9%)
Step 5 Preview
Claude Fable 5.1 is comparatively weak here — closed weights, no self-hosting option
Lowest cost at scale
Step 5 Preview
At $1/$2.7 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Step 5 Preview
At $1/$2.7 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Fable 5.1, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Anyone whose priority is terminal-bench-science agentic research (52.6%, more than double fable 5's 24.7%)
→ Claude Fable 5.1
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is sparse moe architecture — 600b total parameters, only 27b active per token — built for long-horizon agentic work across large codebases and documents
→ Step 5 Preview
That is its strongest area.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Claude Fable 5.1 or Step 5 Preview
Origin (US vs China) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
Claude Fable 5.1: where it fits
Anthropic's September 1, 2026 update to its Fable line for coding and knowledge work, keeping the 1M-token context of Fable 5 while cutting cache-read costs and roughly doubling agentic-research benchmark scores. Released September 1, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for terminal-Bench-Science agentic research (52.6%, more than double Fable 5's 24.7%), cursorBench 3.2 agentic coding (73.4%), cache-read pricing cut to a quarter of other Claude models, and long, multistep, document-heavy professional work with 1M-token context.
Its trade-offs are real: anthropic has not published an official SWE-bench Verified score for this model, restricted Mythos 5.1 variant outscores it on some benchmarks due to lighter safeguards (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 60.9% vs 55.8%), and closed weights, no self-hosting option. At $10 in / $50 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.
Step 5 Preview: where it fits
StepFun's September 20, 2026 flagship preview — a 600B-parameter sparse MoE model (27B active) with a 1M-token context window at $1/$2.70 per million tokens, open weights promised for mid-October. Released September 20, 2026 by StepFun, it is built for sparse MoE architecture — 600B total parameters, only 27B active per token — built for long-horizon agentic work across large codebases and documents, 1M-token context window (64K max output) at $1/$2.70 per million tokens, among the cheapest frontier-scale context windows available, 67.7% on DeepSWE v1.1, ahead of open-weight rivals Kimi K3 (67.5%) and GLM-5.3 (66.9%), and scores 44 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, ranking 27th of 653 models tracked.
Its trade-offs: trails closed frontier models on coding — 67.7% on DeepSWE v1.1 vs GPT-6 Astra's 74.1% and Claude Opus 5's 74.0%, open weights were promised for October 15, 2026 but hadn't shipped as of this writing — API-only for now despite the open-weight roadmap, a 'Preview' release, not StepFun's finished flagship — positioning and pricing may change once weights ship, and stepCodeBench and DeepSWE figures are StepFun's own reported numbers, not yet independently reproduced at scale. At $1 in / $2.7 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
This is less "which is smarter" and more "which ecosystem fits." Claude Fable 5.1 (US) and Step 5 Preview (China) differ on pricing philosophy, data-residency, and tooling as much as on raw scores. Step 5 Preview is the cheaper option, which matters at volume. The pragmatic move is to run one real task through both and judge the outputs against your own constraints — including where your data is allowed to be processed.
Want both Claude Fable 5.1 and Step 5 Preview without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Claude Fable 5.1 or Step 5 Preview better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Fable 5.1 leans toward terminal-bench-science agentic research (52.6%, more than double fable 5's 24.7%) while Step 5 Preview leans toward sparse moe architecture — 600b total parameters, only 27b active per token — built for long-horizon agentic work across large codebases and documents, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or Step 5 Preview?
Step 5 Preview is cheaper — $10/$50 per 1M tokens vs $1/$2.7 per 1M tokens, roughly 10× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Both advertise 1M tokens (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Fable 5.1 and Step 5 Preview together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Fable 5.1, Step 5 Preview and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Fable 5.1 or Step 5 Preview?
Step 5 Preview — released September 20, 2026, about 19 days after Claude Fable 5.1.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.