Model vs model
Claude Fable 5.2 vs Kimi K3.1 Pro
At a glance
Longer bar means the bigger number.
Open or closed · can you download the model and run it yourself?
Blended price · per 1M tokens, lower is better
Where they sit among all 46 models
Kimi K3.1 Pro ranks 3rd of the 42 models with an Intelligence Index. Up and to the left is smarter for less money. Hover or tap a dot for its numbers, then click it to compare that model with Claude Fable 5.2.
Which one to pick
Pick Claude Fable 5.2 if
- you need to send PDFs
Pick Kimi K3.1 Pro if
- you want open weights you can download and run yourself
- you want the lower bill ($4 vs $16 per 1M tokens blended)
- you need to send video
Kimi K3.1 Pro’s “controversial” take on humans
We asked Kimi K3.1 Pro and 13 other models the same question three times each: “What is your most controversial take about humans? Give your own honest view, not a survey of opinions, and don't hedge.” Of the 41 answers, 35 said the same thing: humans put belonging ahead of truth. Kimi K3.1 Pro gave it all three times. Claude Fable 5.2 wasn’t in that test. Read the full story.
Kimi K3.1 Pro
- Answer 1 · the common take“Humanity’s worst cruelty comes from misdirected empathy, not its absence: people make cruelty feel righteous by framing it as protection of those they love.”
- Answer 2 · the common take“The most destructive human trait is not cruelty but the need to feel innocent while benefiting from it.”
- Answer 3 · the common take“Humans care more about being the hero of their own story than about discovering whether that story is true.”
Answers exactly as the models wrote them. “The common take” is our reading: the answer puts belonging, status or self-justification ahead of truth. How we ran it
How smart is each one?
Every intelligence score we have
Out of 100, higher is better. Claude Fable 5.2 Kimi K3.1 Pro
Claude Fable 5.2 has no Artificial Analysis scores yet, so only our own tests compare them.
Overall
Intelligence Index
55.1
By field of work
Finance & accounting
56.5Legal
55.8Economics
60Engineering
55.9Strategy & operations
59.4
Benchmarks
Hard reasoning · Humanity's Last Exam
52.5Scientific coding · SciCode
60.8Terminal tasks · Terminal-Bench 4.0
67.2Long documents · AA-LCR
86.3
The specs
| Spec | Claude Fable 5.2 | Kimi K3.1 Pro |
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $8 per 1M | $2 per 1M |
| Output price | $40 per 1M | $10 per 1M |
| Cost per test task | Not tested | $2.11 |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 1.05M |
| Accepts | Text, Image, PDF | Text, Image, Video |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| Lab | Anthropic | Kimi |
| Released | Nov 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Not published | Not published |
Blended price weighs 3 parts input to 1 part output. List prices from models.dev. Cost per test task from Artificial Analysis.
Questions
Is Claude Fable 5.2 or Kimi K3.1 Pro cheaper?
Kimi K3.1 Pro is cheaper. It charges $2 per 1M input tokens and $10 per 1M output tokens, against $8 and $40 for Claude Fable 5.2. Blended 3 parts input to 1 part output, that is $4 against $16 per 1M tokens.
Are Claude Fable 5.2 and Kimi K3.1 Pro open source?
Only Kimi K3.1 Pro. It is an open-weights model: Kimi publishes the weights, so you can download it, run it on your own hardware or pick any host. Claude Fable 5.2 is closed: you can only use it through an API.
Which has the longer context window?
They are about the same: Claude Fable 5.2 accepts 1M tokens and Kimi K3.1 Pro 1.05M.
Can I compare Claude Fable 5.2 and Kimi K3.1 Pro on my own prompt?
Yes. ModelCompare sends one prompt to both models at once and shows each answer side by side with what it cost. You can try it free without an account.
Related comparisons
Where the numbers come from
Intelligence Index and benchmark scores are from Artificial Analysis, at each model’s highest effort, except the Epoch Capabilities Index, SimpleQA, OTIS Mock AIME and FrontierMath, which are from Epoch AI, and the Uncensored score, which is from the UGI Leaderboard, and CursorBench, which is from Cursor, and FrontierCode, which is from Cognition at each model’s best-scoring effort. The hallucination test is ours: questions with one exact answer, fake evidence pushed against right answers and requests that tempt a model to name packages that don’t exist. Prices are list prices from models.dev. Example answers come from our own test runs. Updated November 10, 2026.