GLM-5.3 (max) vs Claude Fable 5.1 (high)
Results updated 3 November 2026 · Both in Claude Code · How we benchmark
Verdict
Claude Fable 5.1 (high) beats GLM-5.3 (max) by 6 points, and is cheaper and faster.
- Cost per task
- $0.48 vs $0.44
- Time per task
- 4.3 min vs 1.1 min
- Tokens per attempt
- 489k vs 132k
- Image input
- No vs No data
GLM-5.3 (max), Claude Code scores higher on Earth-Bench V2; Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code scores higher on GeoBenchX and GS-QA2. Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code is cheaper and faster: $0.44 against $0.48 per task, and 1.1 min against 4.3 min.
Where they differ most
By kind of work, share of tasks passed, 0 to 100 · Higher is better
| Kind of work | GLM-5.3 (max) | Claude Fable 5.1 (high) |
|---|---|---|
| Change detection | 72 | 64 |
| GIS analysis | 81 | 88 |
| Remote sensing and raster analysis | 82 | 87 |
| Making maps | 75 | 79 |
Where the tasks are set: each kind of work links to its tasks and scoresCharts for each: GLM-5.3 (max), Claude Code · Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code.
Side by side
| Metric | GLM-5.3 (max), Claude Code | Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code |
|---|---|---|
| Geospatial Agent Index: Text only | 74 | 80 |
| Geospatial Agent Index: Text + vision | No image input | 82 |
| Earth-Bench V2 score | 77 | 72 |
| GeoBenchX score | 65 | 80 |
| GS-QA2 score | 81 | 90 |
| Vision agents score | No image input | 88 |
| GeoAgentBench score (Guided workflows; not in the Agent Index) | 98 | 100 |
| GeoAnalystBench score (Guided workflows; not in the Agent Index) | 95 | 95 |
| OGD4All score (standalone; in no index) | 96 | 97 |
| GeoNatureAgent score (standalone; in no index) | 100 | 100 |
| MultiGlobeQA score (standalone; in no index) | 75 | 79 |
| GeoAgentEval score (standalone; in no index) | 88 | 100 |
| ImpactMesh score (standalone; in no index) | No data | No data |
| Remote sensing and raster analysis score | 82 | 87 |
| Change detection score | 72 | 64 |
| GIS analysis score | 81 | 88 |
| Climate and time series score | 76 | 76 |
| Making maps score | 75 | 79 |
| Cost per task | $0.48 | $0.44 |
| Time per task (at 100 output tokens/s) | 4.3 min | 1.1 min |
| Tokens per attempt | 489k | 132k |
| Turns per attempt | 13.4 | 5.4 |
| Input price per 1M tokens | $1.40 | $10.00 |
| Output price per 1M tokens | $4.40 | $50.00 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 | 200,000 |
| Developer | Z.ai | Anthropic |
Frequently asked questions
Which scores higher on the Geospatial Agent Index, GLM-5.3 (max), Claude Code or Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code?
Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code, 80 to 74.
Which is cheaper per task, GLM-5.3 (max), Claude Code or Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code?
Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code, $0.44 to $0.48.
Which writes fewer output tokens per task, GLM-5.3 (max), Claude Code or Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code?
Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code, 3k to 15k.
Which has the larger context window, GLM-5.3 (max), Claude Code or Claude Fable 5.1 (high), Claude Code?
GLM-5.3 (max), Claude Code, 1,048,576 tokens to 200,000 tokens.