Claude Fable 5.2 vs Ling 3.0 Tiny

Price, context window & benchmark comparison

Anthropic

Claude Fable 5.2

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

Ling 3.0 Tiny

inclusionAI
$0.015 / $0.045
Input / Output · per 1M tokens
Compare different models
Anthropic
inclusionAI
Verdict: Ling 3.0 Tiny is 711.1× cheaper than Claude Fable 5.2 on a typical 3:1 input/output mix. Claude Fable 5.2 has the larger context window (1M vs 262K).
Claude Fable 5.2Ling 3.0 Tiny
Input price / 1M$8.00$0.015
Output price / 1M$40.00$0.045
Blended price (3:1)$16.00$0.0225
Cached input / 1M$0.20$0.003
Context window1M262K
Max output128K250K
Intelligence index64.6—
Coding index—26.5
Providers5—
Best provider uptime (30m)100.0%—
Vision inputYesNo
ReasoningYesYes
Tool callingYesYes
Released2026-11-072026-08-06
Retirement——

Cost calculator

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.2 or Ling 3.0 Tiny?

Ling 3.0 Tiny is 711.1× cheaper than Claude Fable 5.2 on a typical 3:1 input/output mix.

Claude Fable 5.2 vs Ling 3.0 Tiny: which has a bigger context window?

Claude Fable 5.2: 1,000,000 tokens. Ling 3.0 Tiny: 262,144 tokens.

How much would 1 million requests cost?

At 2,000 input + 500 output tokens per request: Claude Fable 5.2 ≈ $36,000, Ling 3.0 Tiny ≈ $52.50.

More comparisons