Claude Fable 5.2 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017

Price, context window & benchmark comparison

Anthropic

Claude Fable 5.2

Anthropic
$8.00 / $40.00
Input / Output · per 1M tokens
VS
DeepSeek

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017

DeepSeek
$0.098 / $0.29
Input / Output · per 1M tokens
Compare different models
Anthropic
DeepSeek
Verdict: DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is 108.8× cheaper than Claude Fable 5.2 on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. Claude Fable 5.2 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (64.6 vs 28.6). DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 has the larger context window (1M vs 1M).
Claude Fable 5.2DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017
Input price / 1M$8.00$0.098
Output price / 1M$40.00$0.29
Blended price (3:1)$16.00$0.15
Cached input / 1M$0.20$0.0029
Context window1M1M
Max output128K393K
Intelligence index64.628.6
Coding index——
Providers547
Best provider uptime (30m)100.0%100.0%
Vision inputYesYes
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Released2026-11-072026-10-17
Retirement——

Cost calculator

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.2 or DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017?

DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 is 108.8× cheaper than Claude Fable 5.2 on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.

Claude Fable 5.2 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017: which has a bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5.2: 1,000,000 tokens. DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017: 1,048,576 tokens.

How much would 1 million requests cost?

At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: Claude Fable 5.2 ≈ $36,000, DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 ≈ $343.00.

More comparisons