Claude Fable 5 vs Llama 4 Maverick

Anthropic · US  |  Meta · US · Updated June 2026

Quick verdict

Pick Claude Fable 5 for the hardest reasoning and most complex problems or long-horizon, multi-step agentic work. Pick Llama 4 Maverick for open weights, 1m context or strong image + text understanding. Choose Llama 4 Maverick if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Claude Fable 5 if you want a managed API.

Claude Fable 5 (Anthropic) and Llama 4 Maverick (Meta) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Fable 5 is anthropic's top public Mythos-class model and its most capable yet, though tier access was temporarily suspended in June 2026 under a US export-control directive. Llama 4 Maverick is meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. They diverge most on price and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.

Key differences at a glance

Side-by-side specs

SpecClaude Fable 5Llama 4 Maverick
ProviderAnthropic (US) Meta (US)
ReleasedJune 9, 2026 April 2025
Context window1M (~1,500 pages) 1M (~1,500 pages)
Price (in/out)$10/$50 per 1M tokens Open weight (self-host / free)
Open weight?No — API only Yes — self-hostable
Modalitiestext, image, code text, image, code
SWE-Bench VerifiedNot published Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1MNot published Not published

Who wins what

The hardest reasoning and most complex problems

Claude Fable 5

A core design strength of Claude Fable 5.

Long-horizon, multi-step agentic work

Claude Fable 5

A core design strength of Claude Fable 5.

Frontier-level analysis and research

Claude Fable 5

A core design strength of Claude Fable 5.

Open weights, 1M context

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

Strong image + text understanding

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

Self-hostable

Llama 4 Maverick

A core design strength of Llama 4 Maverick.

Lowest cost at scale

Llama 4 Maverick

At Open weight (self-host / free), 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

Llama 4 Maverick

At Open weight (self-host / free) it undercuts Claude Fable 5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.

A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs

Llama 4 Maverick

Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Claude Fable 5 is API-only.

Anyone whose priority is the hardest reasoning and most complex problems

Claude Fable 5

It is specifically built for that.

Anyone whose priority is open weights, 1m context

Llama 4 Maverick

That is its strongest area.

Claude Fable 5: where it fits

Anthropic's top public Mythos-class model and its most capable yet, though tier access was temporarily suspended in June 2026 under a US export-control directive. Released June 9, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for the hardest reasoning and most complex problems, long-horizon, multi-step agentic work, frontier-level analysis and research, and work where maximum capability outweighs cost.

Its trade-offs are real: highest price in the Claude lineup, and tier access was temporarily suspended in June 2026 under a US export-control directive. At $10 in / $50 out per million tokens, it sits in the premium price band.

Llama 4 Maverick: where it fits

Meta's open-weight 1M-context multimodal model for self-hosted deployments. Released April 2025 by Meta, it is built for open weights, 1M context, strong image + text understanding, self-hostable, and 400B MoE, 17B active.

Its trade-offs: needs serious hardware to self-host, and trails closed frontier on reasoning. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.

The bottom line for this matchup

The defining split here is open vs. closed. Llama 4 Maverick gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Claude Fable 5 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.

Want both Claude Fable 5 and Llama 4 Maverick 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 pricing

Frequently asked questions

Is Claude Fable 5 or Llama 4 Maverick 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 leans toward the hardest reasoning and most complex problems while Llama 4 Maverick leans toward open weights, 1m context, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or Llama 4 Maverick?

Llama 4 Maverick is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Claude Fable 5 is API-metered at $10/$50 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.

Which has the bigger context window?

Both advertise 1M (~1,500 pages). Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.

Can I use both Claude Fable 5 and Llama 4 Maverick together?

Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Fable 5, Llama 4 Maverick 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 or Llama 4 Maverick?

Claude Fable 5 — released June 9, 2026, about 14 months after Llama 4 Maverick.

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.