🎁 New Sign up free, 10 calls on us. Up to $1, no card needed.

Claude Fable 5 vs DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731)

vs

Which one, when — curated verdict, not a benchmark table

Both models share a 1000000-token context window, so the split is about price, modality and output length: claude-fable-5 takes text and image input and always runs with thinking enabled (it cannot be disabled), while deepseek-v4-flash-0731 is text-only but allows up to 393216 output tokens against Fable's 128000. On the rate card claude-fable-5 costs about 32 times more per million input tokens ($10 vs $0.308) and about 54 times more on output ($50 vs $0.924). Pick claude-fable-5 when you need image input or its built-in reasoning pass; pick deepseek-v4-flash-0731 for cheap, long text generations.

Pricing

Claude Fable 5 DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) Δ
Input / 1M tokens $10 $0.308 32×
Output / 1M tokens $50 $0.924 54×
Cache read / 1M tokens $1 $0.0308 32×
Cache write 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) no separate charge

Rates from the live catalog at build time; each model page carries the current card.

Where they sit — input price per 1M tokens across all 63 chat models on this billing unit (log scale)

Capabilities

Claude Fable 5 DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731)
Tool use yes yes
Thinking control always on yes — vendor dial not published
Structured output yes yes
Prompt caching explicit (you mark the prefix) implicit (automatic)
Cache lifetime 5m default, 1h option no fixed TTL (evicted when unused)
Minimum cached prefix 1024 tokens not published

Specs

Claude Fable 5 DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731)
Input modalities text image text
Output modalities text text
Released 2026-06-09 2026-07-31
Knowledge cutoff 2026-01
Context window 1M 1M
Max output 128K 393K
Thinking parameter output_config.effort (thinking.type is adaptive-only and needs no configuration)
Accepted values
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max

both "enabled" and "disabled" return 400

Default

thinking always on (adaptive)

effort
  • high

Specs are transcribed from each vendor’s documentation; a row a vendor does not publish is left out rather than inferred. Full sources: Claude Fable 5 · DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731)

One prompt, both models — measured through the gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. CHECK exactly 3 sentences

Claude Fable 5 passed · 3 sentences

When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating extensive internal "thinking" tokens before each answer, and those tokens are billed as output even though users never see them. Output tokens typically cost several times more than input tokens, so adding thousands of hidden reasoning tokens per request effectively multiplied our per-query cost. In short, we're paying for a much longer response behind the scenes in exchange for higher answer quality, and we can manage this by tuning reasoning effort levels or reserving reasoning mode for complex tasks only.

out 228 tok latency 6.7 s

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) passed · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning mode prompts the model to generate extensive internal chain-of-thought tokens before answering, often multiplying total token output per query by several times. This directly inflates costs because we are billed per token, and these reasoning tokens are processed at a premium compute tier that carries a higher price per million tokens. However, this spend buys measurably higher accuracy and fewer failed calls, so we are tracking it against specific error-reduction KPIs to ensure the ROI justifies the increase.

out 365 tok (+266 thinking) latency 5.1 s

Instruction following (exactly three sentences — countable), audience shaping (CFO register), and the hidden-thinking billing gap the token meters below expose.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. CHECK fix passes tests

Claude Fable 5 passed · 8/8 cases

## Fixed code ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ## Explanation The original function counts **adjacent equal pairs** rather than **items in a run**: a run of length *n* contains only *n − 1* equal neighbor pairs, so every result is off by one — a single-element list yields 0 instead of 1, and `[1, 2, 2]` yields 1 instead of 2 (which callers perceive as "missing" the run at the end). The fix is to initialize both `cur` and `best` to 1 (any nonempty list has a run of at least length 1), reset `cur` to 1 rather than 0 when

out 531 tok latency 12.5 s

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) passed · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 best = max(best, cur) else: cur = 1 return best ``` The original bug stems from initializing `cur` to 0 and only incrementing it when adjacent elements are equal, which counts the number of *equal transitions* rather than the actual run length—so every run of length L is reported as L−1, and a single‑element run (with no transitions) yields 0. Moreover, because `best` is updated only inside the equality branch, it never accounts for a run that ends at the last element if that run is longer than any previously seen (though the real issue remains the off‑by‑one). […]

out 1268 tok (+1016 thinking) latency 14.0 s

Whether the fix is actually correct (runnable), explanation density, and token efficiency on a bounded task.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. CHECK valid JSON, schema exact

Claude Fable 5 passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3 (September quarter)", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on interpretation: "up eleven and change" is rendered as 11 (the precise figure isn't stated), and guidance is null because it was explicitly withheld.

out 192 tok latency 6.5 s

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) passed · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": null, "guidance": null }

out 1119 tok (+1072 thinking) latency 12.3 s

Schema obedience (no invented fields), hallucination pressure (guidance is explicitly withheld), and structured-output path differences.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. CHECK 120 words, 0 banned words

Claude Fable 5 passed · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching for our API Gateway** Starting today, your repeated prompts are cached once and reused across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and any other provider you route through the gateway. Instead of paying full token costs every time your application sends the same system prompt or context block, the gateway detects matching prefixes and serves cached results in milliseconds. Why keep spending money and latency on identical requests? Early adopters report cost reductions of up to 60 percent on high-volume workloads, along with faster median response times. Configuration is simple: enable caching in your dashboard, set a TTL, and choose which routes participate. Cache entries are encrypted at rest and never shared between accounts. Available now on all plans.

out 1173 tok latency 18.2 s

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) missed · 141 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Prompt Cache for API Gateway** We are pleased to announce Prompt Cache, a new feature that stores and reuses identical prompt prefixes across all connected LLM providers. By automatically recognizing repeated requests, this cache reduces token consumption and lowers latency without altering your application logic. Whether you use OpenAI, Anthropic, or open-source models, the cache operates transparently, ensuring consistent behavior while cutting costs. Developers can configure cache TTL and scoping rules via a simple API call, giving you precise control over data freshness and privacy. This feature also minimizes redundant upstream calls, freeing provider rate limits for more critical workloads. Start caching today through the dashboard or CLI, and watch your operational expenses drop significantly. […]

out 254 tok (+80 thinking) latency 4.4 s

Constraint obedience (word budget, banned-word list, the single question), style fingerprint, and length control.

Switch between them with one line

Both ids are in every tab below — the highlighted pair of lines is the only edit. Same endpoint, same key, same request shape.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-fable-5",
    # model="deepseek-v4-flash-0731",  # uncomment this line, comment the one above
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Get an API key →

FAQ

Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5 or DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731)?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) is cheaper on input / 1m tokens ($0.308 vs $10, 32× apart). Other rows may point the other way — the table above carries the full card, and real cost depends on your mix.

Can I A/B test Claude Fable 5 against DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) without two integrations?

Yes. Both are served through the same OpenAI-compatible endpoint with one API key — switching is a one-line model-string change, so you can route a fraction of traffic to each and compare bills directly.

Do Claude Fable 5 and DeepSeek V4 Flash (0731) support prompt caching?

Yes — both bill cached reads below their input rate, so warm-prefix workloads cost less than the list rates suggest. The exact cache-read rows are in the pricing table above.

Related comparisons

From our measured studies