The 2026 flagship fight: Sol's throughput pricing versus Fable's 1M-context depth.
gpt-5.6-sol · openai
claude-fable-5 · anthropic
Benchmark
| Workload Scenario | GPT-5.6 Sol | Claude Fable 5 | Price Delta |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1M input tokens (raw text) | $5.00 | $10.00 | −$5.00 |
| 1M output tokens (generation) | $30.00 | $50.00 | −$20.00 |
| 1M tokens · 70% input / 30% output mix | $12.50 | $22.00 | −$9.50 |
| Standard chat turn (4K in / 800 out, 50% cached) | $0.035 | $0.062 | −$0.027 |
| Monthly scale (10K requests / day) | $10,500.00 | $18,600.00 | −$8,100.00 |
Negative difference = GPT-5.6 Sol is cheaper. Positive = Claude Fable 5 is cheaper.
Scaling Curve
Total cost of a token volume at 70/30 input/output split (uncached). Log-log scale.
Verdict
GPT-5.6 Sol is cheaper on both input and output rates, so it costs less at every input/output mix. Price alone still isn't the whole decision: capability, latency and context limits (GPT-5.6 Sol: 1.1M, Claude Fable 5: 1M) may justify the premium for your task.
FAQ
On input, GPT-5.6 Sol is cheaper ($5.00/M vs $10.00/M). On output, GPT-5.6 Sol is cheaper ($30.00/M vs $50.00/M). The same model is cheaper on both sides, so it wins at every mix.
A chat-style request (4,000 input + 800 output tokens, 50% cached) costs $0.035 on GPT-5.6 Sol and $0.062 on Claude Fable 5 — GPT-5.6 Sol is 1.8× cheaper for that workload.
GPT-5.6 Sol supports 1,050,000 tokens (128K max output); Claude Fable 5 supports 1,000,000 (128K max output). GPT-5.6 Sol fits 1.1× more context, which matters for long documents and agents.