新帳號 免費註冊,送 10 次呼叫,最高 $1,免綁卡。

Claude Fable 5.1 vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Claude Fable 5.1 採邀請制。下方的數字是即時費率,但要先取得工作空間的授權才能呼叫;如果你打算依據這份比較來開發,請先向我們申請開通。

vs

什麼情況選哪一個

兩者皆共用 1000000-token 的上下文並接受文字與影像,因此區別在於成本與控制:claude-fable-5-1 在輸入的成本高出 25x,輸出的成本高出 31.25x (每百萬 $10/$50 相對於 $0.4/$1.6),且其 thinking 模式無法關閉。當你需要常駐開啟的推論功能,外加單次最高 128000 輸出 tokens 時,請選擇 claude-fable-5-1;若針對高用量或對成本敏感的工作、影片輸入,或當你需要停用 thinking,並接受 65536 最大輸出與每百萬 $1.6 的 thinking 輸入費率時,請選擇 qwen3.7-plus。

Benchmark 成績

高於平均沒有模型更高Claude Fable 5.119 / 213 / 21Qwen3.7 Plus11 / 244 / 24
Claude Fable 5.1 Qwen3.7 Plus 其他有成績的模型 其他模型平均 ★ 沒有模型分數更高
DeepSWE 1.1
67.4%
16.5%
OSWorld 2.0 partial
80.7%
21.5%
HealthBench Professional
58.1%
N/A
JobBench
N/A
27.6%
GPQA Diamond
93.7%
90.3%
ERQA
N/A
69.8%
AutomationBench
31.4%
N/A
LVBench
N/A
76.2%

供應商公布: Alibaba (Qwen) Anthropic ByteDance DeepSeek Google MiniMax Moonshot OpenAI Tencent Z.ai

定價

Claude Fable 5.1 Qwen3.7 Plus Δ
輸入 / 1M tokens $10 $0.4 25×
輸出 / 1M tokens $50 $1.6 31×
快取讀取 / 1M tokens $0.25 $0.08 3.1×
快取寫入 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) 1.25x -

費率取自網站建置時的即時目錄;各模型頁面都列有最新的價目。

兩者的相對位置:每 1M tokens 的輸入價格,涵蓋同一計費單位下全部 79 個聊天模型(對數尺度)

$0.05 · Qwen3 VL Flash $30 · GPT-5.4 Pro

功能

Claude Fable 5.1 Qwen3.7 Plus
工具使用 是 是
思考控制 一律開啟 可設定
結構化輸出 是 是
提示詞快取 顯式(由你標記前綴) 隱式 + 顯式
快取存活時間 5m default, 1h option explicit: 5m, reset on hit
最小快取前綴 1024 個 token 1024 個 token

規格

Claude Fable 5.1 Qwen3.7 Plus
輸入模態 文字 圖像 文字 圖像 影片
輸出模態 文字 文字
發布日期 2026-09-01 2026-06-01
知識截止日期 2026-06 -
上下文視窗 1M 1M
最大輸出 128K 66K
思考參數 output_config.effort (thinking is adaptive-only and always on)
  • enable_thinking
  • thinking_budget
  • preserve_thinking
可接受的值
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
enable_thinking
  • true
  • false
thinking_budget
  • in tokens
preserve_thinking
  • true
  • false
預設值

thinking always on (adaptive)

effort
  • high

on

the Qwen3.7 Plus series is hybrid thinking with thinking enabled by default, and preserve_thinking is off

規格摘錄自各供應商的文件;供應商沒有公布的項目就直接略過,不自行推測。 完整來源: Claude Fable 5.1 · Qwen3.7 Plus

同一段提示詞,兩個模型,經閘道實測

提示詞 Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. 檢查 恰好 3 句

Claude Fable 5.1 通過 · 3 sentences

When we enabled reasoning, the model started generating a long chain of internal "thinking" tokens before producing each answer, and we're billed for those tokens at the same output rate even though users never see them. In practice, that hidden reasoning often runs several times longer than the visible response, so the total tokens per request roughly doubled while the number of requests stayed flat. The upside is measurably better accuracy on complex tasks, so the right conversation is whether that quality gain justifies the cost—and if not, we can restrict reasoning to the workflows that actually need it rather than turning it on globally.

輸出 186 tok 延遲 3.2 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 3 sentences

Enabling reasoning requires the model to generate extensive internal "thinking" tokens to process complex logic before delivering a final answer. Because our vendor charges us per token consumed, this hidden computational overhead effectively doubles our output volume for the exact same number of user requests. Consequently, our costs have doubled because we are now paying for the model's increased processing time to achieve higher-quality, more accurate results.

輸出 1428 tok (+1345 思考) 延遲 25.2 s

是否照指令做(剛好三句,數得出來)、語氣是否貼合對象(寫給 CFO 看),以及下方 token 計量顯示出的隱藏思考計費落差。

提示詞 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. 檢查 修正後通過測試

Claude Fable 5.1 通過 · 8/8 cases

```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): cur = cur + 1 if xs[i] == xs[i - 1] else 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` The bug is that `cur` counts *matches between adjacent elements* rather than *elements in the run*: it starts at 0 and only increments when `xs[i] == xs[i-1]`, so a run of length k produces a count of k−1. That's why a single element returns 0 instead of 1, and why every other run also comes out one short — the "misses runs at the end" reports are the same off-by-one seen on inputs like `[1, 2, 2]`, where the trailing run of length 2 is reported as 1 (the original code does update `best` inside the loop, so end-of-list runs aren't actually skipped, just undercounted). […]

輸出 882 tok (+507 思考) 延遲 3.4 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 8/8 cases

## Fixed Code ```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 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ## Bug Explanation The function has two related bugs rooted in how it counts run lengths. First, `cur` is initialized to `0` and only incremented on matches, so it counts the number of *transitions* between equal elements rather than the total elements in the run—a run of N identical items only reaches `cur = N − 1`, undercounting by one. This also causes the single-element case to return `0`, since the loop never executes and `cur` never increments. […]

輸出 2317 tok (+2005 思考) 延遲 40.5 s

修正是否真的正確(跑得起來)、說明的資訊密度,以及在範圍明確的任務上的 token 效率。

提示詞 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. 檢查 有效的 JSON,完全符合 schema

Claude Fable 5.1 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3 (September quarter)", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on judgment calls (not part of the object): - **revenue_usd_m**: The text says "412 for the topline" but never states the currency or that the figure is in millions; it's also on a constant-currency basis and prefaced with "call it," so it's approximate. If you want strict literalism, this should be `null`. - **growth_pct**: "Eleven and change" means slightly above 11%; the exact figure isn't given. - **quarter**: "September quarter" is Q3 on a calendar basis, consistent with the reference to a pending Q4 close. - **guidance**: Explicitly withheld, so `null`.

輸出 633 tok (+349 思考) 延遲 3.8 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 5/5 fields, guidance null

{ "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "September", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null }

輸出 1807 tok (+1750 思考) 延遲 31.6 s

是否遵守 schema(不自創欄位)、面對幻覺誘因的表現(題目明確不給 guidance),以及結構化輸出路徑的差異。

提示詞 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. 檢查 120 詞,0 個禁用詞

Claude Fable 5.1 通過 · 121 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching for the Gateway.** Starting today, your API gateway can cache prompts once and reuse them across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and any other provider you route to. Long system instructions, retrieval context, and few-shot examples are stored at the gateway layer, so switching models no longer means paying to resend the same tokens. Why send the same 8,000-token preamble to three different vendors when you could send it once? Our cache normalizes prompt segments, fingerprints them, and serves matching prefixes from memory before the request ever reaches an upstream API. Early customers report token costs falling by 30 to 60 percent on high-volume workloads, with median latency dropping alongside. Available today on all Team and Enterprise plans.

輸出 1722 tok (+1463 思考) 延遲 2.9 s

Qwen3.7 Plus 通過 · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

Introducing PromptCache, our new API gateway feature designed to store and reuse prompts across multiple artificial intelligence providers. Have you ever noticed how repeatedly sending identical queries drains your budget and increases latency? PromptCache solves this by intelligently storing responses at the gateway level. When your application requests the same prompt from a different provider, the system instantly returns the cached result. This drastically reduces API costs and accelerates response times for your users. You can configure custom expiration times and set specific fallback rules for each vendor. You must stop paying twice for the exact same computation. Please upgrade your entire infrastructure today and experience much faster and cheaper integrations without changing a single line of your application code.

輸出 4453 tok (+4312 思考) 延遲 76.8 s

是否遵守限制(字數上限、禁用詞清單、只能有一句問句)、文字風格的特徵,以及長度控制。

改一行程式碼就能在兩者之間切換

下面每個頁籤都列了這兩個模型 ID,要改的只有醒目標示的那兩行。端點、金鑰和請求格式都不變。

from openai import OpenAI

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

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-fable-5-1",
    # model="qwen3.7-plus",  # 取消這一行的註解,並把上一行註解掉
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

取得 API 金鑰 →

常見問題

Claude Fable 5.1 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 哪個比較便宜?

以「輸入 / 1M tokens」來看,Qwen3.7 Plus 比較便宜($0.4 對 $10,相差 25×)。其他項目的結果可能相反,完整價目請看上表;實際成本要看你的用量組合。

可以只串接一次,就對 Claude Fable 5.1 和 Qwen3.7 Plus 做 A/B 測試嗎?

可以。兩個模型都走同一個 OpenAI 相容端點,用的也是同一把 API 金鑰,切換時只要改一行裡的模型名稱字串。你可以把一部分流量分別導到兩邊,再直接比較帳單。

Claude Fable 5.1 與 Qwen3.7 Plus 支援提示詞快取嗎?

支援。兩者的快取讀取費率都低於輸入費率,所以前綴已經進快取的工作負載,實際成本會比官網價算出來的低。確切的快取讀取價格請見上方定價表。

相關比較