Head to head
Z.ai: GLM 5.3 vs Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1
Live prices, context windows, capabilities, and measured quality — updated continuously.
Side by side
| Metric | Z.ai: GLM 5.3 Z Ai | Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 Anthropic |
|---|---|---|
| Input $/M tokens | $1.40 | $10.00 |
| Output $/M tokens | $4.40 | $50.00 |
| Context window | 1.3M | 1.0M |
| Max output | 262K | 128K |
| WM Score | 91 | 92 |
| Benchmark quality | 92.3 | 97.5 |
| Hosts serving it | 24 | 4 |
| Throughput (tok/s) | 99 | 62 |
| Latency (ms) | 391 | 4392 |
| Vision | ||
| Tools | ||
| Reasoning | ||
| JSON mode |
Which should you pick?
Z.ai: GLM 5.3 costs less per million input tokens — about 7.1× cheaper than Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1. Anthropic: Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on measured quality. Z.ai: GLM 5.3 takes a larger context window, which matters for long documents or big codebases. Prices here are live list prices; the same model can cost less on a different host, so check the model page for the cheapest offering.