对比AI模型
并排比较最多4个AI模型的基准测试、价格、速度和功能。我们的LLM比较工具从350+个模型中提取实时数据，包括GPT-4o、Claude Opus、Gemini 2.5 Pro、DeepSeek R1和Llama 4。选择下方任意模型，查看它们在上下文窗口、输出定价、功能支持和综合评分方面的对比。
Anthropic
Composite Score
0/6 signal wins
Claude Fable 5 (batch) leads on 1/6 signals
| Signal | Claude Fable 5 | Delta | Claude Fable 5 (batch) |
|---|---|---|---|
Capabilities | 100 | -- | |
Benchmarks | 96 | -- | |
Pricing | 50 | -25 | |
Context window size | 95 | -- | |
Recency | 100 | -- | |
Output Capacity | 85 | -- | |
| Overall Result | 0 wins | of 6 | 1 wins |
Claude Fable 5
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5 (batch)
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5 (batch) saves you $1750.00/month
That's $21000.00/year compared to Claude Fable 5 at your current usage level of 100K calls/month.
Claude Fable 5 and Claude Fable 5 (batch) are extremely close in overall performance (only 0 points apart). Your best choice depends entirely on which specific strengths matter most for your use case.
By Use Case
Best for Quality
Claude Fable 5
Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
Best for Cost
Claude Fable 5 (batch)
50% lower pricing; better value at scale
Best for Reliability
Claude Fable 5
Higher uptime and faster response speeds
Best for Prototyping
Claude Fable 5
Stronger community support and better developer experience
Best for Production
Claude Fable 5
Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
by Anthropic
- Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
- Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
- Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
- Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale
Claude Fable 5
Anthropic
Claude Fable 5 (batch)
Anthropic
Claude Opus 5 (Fast)
Anthropic
| Metric | Claude Fable 5 | Claude Fable 5 (batch) | Claude Opus 5 (Fast) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Overall Score | 97 | 97 | 95 |
| Rank | 1 | 2 | 3 |
| Quality Rank | #1 | #2 | #3 |
| Adoption Rank | #1 | #2 | #3 |
| Status | |||
| Confidence | 高置信度 | 高置信度 | 高置信度 |
| Parameters | -- | -- | -- |
| Context Window | 1.0M tokens | 1.0M tokens | 1.0M tokens |
| Pricing | $10.00/$50.00/M | $5.00/$25.00/M | $10.00/$50.00/M |
| Signal Scores | |||
| Capabilities | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Benchmarks | 96 | 96 | -- |
| Pricing | 50 | 75 | 50 |
| Context window size | 95 | 95 | 95 |
| Recency | 100 | 100 | 100 |
| Output Capacity | 85 | 85 | 85 |
使用上方的比较工具选择最多4个AI模型。我们从基准测试、每百万令牌价格、上下文窗口大小、输出容量、功能（视觉、函数调用、推理）和综合评分等方面进行比较。数据每小时刷新。
关键指标包括：基准测试分数（MMLU、SWE-bench、Arena Elo）、定价（每百万令牌的输入和输出成本）、上下文窗口大小、输出令牌限制、延迟、功能（视觉、推理、函数调用、JSON模式），以及模型是否开源。
这取决于您的使用场景。GPT-4o在多模态任务中表现出色且拥有更大的生态系统，而Claude Opus在扩展推理和安全性方面领先。使用我们的工具直接比较它们，查看最新的基准测试分数和定价。