Model Comparison
Claude Fable 5.2 vs GPT-6 Astra
Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) leads GPT-6 Astra (max) by 560 Elo, and their 95% ranges sit 473 Elo apart. Even Claude Fable 5.2's lowest-rated configuration, Claude Fable 5.2 (low), ranks above GPT-6 Astra (max). Among 87 models, each ranked by its best configuration, Claude Fable 5.2 is #2 and GPT-6 Astra is #13. Cost per script: $2.22 for Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) and $1.15 for GPT-6 Astra (max).
Last updated , from board data generated at 17:52 UTC.
Picks and Verdict
PickClaude Fable 5.2
Claude Fable 5.2 (high)
Pick Claude Fable 5.2 (high) over Astra at max for nearly the same price, since it sits 398 Elo above it with separate ranges and finishes in 4.0 minutes instead of 9.2.
PickGPT-6 Astra
GPT-6 Astra (max)
Pick GPT-6 Astra (max) for accurate drafts with the cleanest Slop Score on this page, 88.6, when you plan to rework the voice yourself.
At almost the same price, Claude Fable 5.2 is the far better writer, and the faster one. Fable is the #2 model of 87 and GPT-6 Astra the #13 model, each ranked by its best setting. Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) leads GPT-6 Astra (max) by 560 Elo, with 95% ranges 473 Elo apart. Further down is the useful comparison: Claude Fable 5.2 (high) costs $1.22 a script against $1.15 for Astra at max, sits 398 Elo above it with separate ranges, wins all ten scripts, and finishes in 4.0 minutes instead of 9.2. Even Fable at low, $0.460 and 1.4 minutes, sits 302 Elo above Astra's best. At high Fable leads on tone, continuity and YouTube structure by three to seven points, the two tie on substance at 87.5, and Astra's one clear edge is the Slop Score: 88.6, the best on this page. Astra's ladder pays too, +195 Elo from medium to max for about 4.4 times the price, so max is the Astra I'd use. On Fable, xhigh adds 162 Elo over high with separate ranges for about 1.8 times the price, and max effort costs $5.75 and 19.9 minutes for 27 Elo less than xhigh. I'd make Fable at high my default here and step up to xhigh for the script I film.
Disclosure: Claude Fable 5.2 and GPT-6 Astra each come from the same lab as one of the judges (Claude Opus 5.5 and GPT-6.1 Sol). Neither is scored by its own lab alone (how the panel works). The judge analysis measures how much each judge favors its own lab.
How to Read the Writing Score, Writing Elo and 95% Ranges
Writing Score and Writing Elo. The Writing Score (0 to 100) is the weighted average of the nine metric scores: seven from the judges, Length Adherence from code and the Slop Score half from each. The Writing Elo is a rating from pairwise comparisons: on each script, each configuration's average across its drafts is compared with every other configuration's, and gaps within the draft-to-draft variation count as draws. Elo rewards winning often, so the two can put configurations in a different order.
Elo ranges. Each 95% range shows how far a configuration's Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently. It comes from resampling every configuration's recorded draft scores on each reference script and ranking again. Comparing two separate ranges does not test the Elo gap between them: ranges far apart are strong evidence for the order, and overlapping ranges do not mean a tie. The reference scripts stay fixed, so the ranges say nothing about new scripts. The methodology page has the full description.
All Thinking Levels of Both Models
Every ranked configuration of Claude Fable 5.2 and GPT-6 Astra, scored on the same 10 scripts by the same four judges.
- Each row is one configuration: the model at one thinking level. The dot is its Writing Elo, a rating from pairwise comparisons of the scores on each script, and the bar is its 95% range: how far that Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently.
- Each bar describes one configuration. Overlap alone does not establish a tie or decide their order. Comparing these ranges does not directly test the difference between a pair.
- The table under the chart lists the same configurations in the same order and adds the Writing Score (the 0 to 100 consensus of the judges and code), cost, time and configuration rank (the place among all configurations on the board).
Shaded rows are the configurations chosen for the metric comparison below.
| Configuration | Writing Elo | 95% Range | Writing Score | Cost / Script | Time / Script | Configuration Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) | 2673 | 2630 to 2717 | 85.6 | $2.22 | 7.4 min | #3 |
| Claude Fable 5.2 (max effort) | 2646 | 2599 to 2689 | 85.5 | $5.75 | 19.9 min | #4 |
| Claude Fable 5.2 (high) | 2511 | 2455 to 2555 | 84.8 | $1.22 | 4.0 min | #5 |
| Claude Fable 5.2 (medium) | 2422 | 2370 to 2469 | 84.3 | $0.561 | 1.8 min | #11 |
| Claude Fable 5.2 (low) | 2415 | 2370 to 2454 | 84.1 | $0.460 | 1.4 min | #12 |
| GPT-6 Astra (max) | 2113 | 2070 to 2157 | 82.3 | $1.15 | 9.2 min | #27 |
| GPT-6 Astra (medium) | 1918 | 1881 to 1954 | 80.7 | $0.262 | 1.5 min | #41 |
Cost is one script at the API list price of the route used, uncached and without judging. Time is the average for one accepted script, retries included.
Computed Findings Across Thinking Levels
Each finding is computed from the configurations above. The 95% ranges describe individual configurations; overlap alone establishes neither a tie nor an order for a pair.
- Best Configurations Head to Head. Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) leads GPT-6 Astra (max) by 560 Elo, and their 95% ranges do not overlap (2630 to 2717 against 2070 to 2157), which is strong evidence for that order.
- Every Claude Fable 5.2 Configuration Ranks Higher. All five Claude Fable 5.2 configurations rank above both GPT-6 Astra configurations: the lowest-rated, Claude Fable 5.2 (low) at Elo 2415, still beats GPT-6 Astra (max) at Elo 2113. Their 95% ranges do not overlap.
- Lowest Thinking Levels Head to Head. At their lowest thinking levels, Claude Fable 5.2 (low) at Elo 2415 and $0.460 per script leads GPT-6 Astra (medium) at Elo 1918 and $0.262 per script by 497 Elo. Their 95% ranges do not overlap.
- Same Level Name, Side by Side. Claude Fable 5.2 has the higher Writing Elo at every level name both models use: medium and max. The 95% ranges do not overlap at any of them. Level names come from each provider, so the same name does not promise the same reasoning budget.
- Cheapest Claude Fable 5.2 Configuration Above GPT-6 Astra's Best. The cheapest Claude Fable 5.2 configuration with a higher Writing Elo than GPT-6 Astra (max), at Elo 2113 and $1.15 per script, is Claude Fable 5.2 (low), at Elo 2415 and $0.460 per script. It costs less than the configuration it beats.
- Lowest to Highest Thinking Level. Claude Fable 5.2 moves +231 Elo from low to max effort, at about 13 times the cost per script. GPT-6 Astra moves +195 Elo from medium to max, at about 4.4 times the cost per script.
Writing Elo at Each Shared Level Name
| Level | Claude Fable 5.2 | GPT-6 Astra | Gap | 95% Ranges |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| medium | 2422 | 1918 | +504 | Separate |
| max | 2646 | 2113 | +533 | Separate |
Gap is Claude Fable 5.2 minus GPT-6 Astra at the same level name, using each model's highest-rated configuration at that level.
Two Chosen Configurations Compared
Pick one configuration of each model to compare their metric scores, consistency across drafts and per-script scores. Each menu starts on the model's best configuration.
Scores by Metric
Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) scores higher on eight of the nine metrics and GPT-6 Astra (max) on one. Weighted by each metric's share of the Writing Score, YouTube Best Practices does the most to put Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) ahead, with a 7.6-point lead on that metric. The weight beside each metric is its share of the Writing Score.
Consistency Across Drafts
| Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) | GPT-6 Astra (max) | |
|---|---|---|
| Score spread across drafts (±) | 1.44 | 1.87 |
| Lowest script score | 83.6 Script 10 | 80.6 Script 1 |
| Highest script score | 88.0 Script 9 | 85.8 Script 9 |
| Range across scripts | 4.4 | 5.2 |
Spread is how much the Writing Score moves between a configuration's drafts, and lower is steadier. Green marks the better number in each row.
Scores by Script
Writing Score on each reference script. Gap is Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) minus GPT-6 Astra (max), and the higher score is in bold.
| Script | Claude Fable 5.2 (xhigh) | GPT-6 Astra (max) | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Script 1 opinion / warning explainer | 83.7 | 80.6 | +3.1 |
| Script 2 news-analysis / skeptical explainer | 85.4 | 82.0 | +3.4 |
| Script 3 personal roadmap / opinion | 85.5 | 84.3 | +1.2 |
| Script 4 short explainer | 85.4 | 82.7 | +2.7 |
| Script 5 news-analysis / opinion explainer | 86.1 | 81.3 | +4.8 |
| Script 6 founder announcement / personal origin story | 85.9 | 83.6 | +2.3 |
| Script 7 personal technical walkthrough / agentic workflow case study | 87.3 | 81.6 | +5.7 |
| Script 8 product release announcement / personal observation | 85.1 | 80.6 | +4.5 |
| Script 9 career guide / hiring analysis | 88.0 | 85.8 | +2.2 |
| Script 10 engineering process walkthrough / presentation adaptation | 83.6 | 80.7 | +2.9 |
Scorecards and Thinking Pages
Each configuration name in the table above opens its own scorecard.
Compare With Another Model
Pick a second model. A pair with its own written match-up opens that page, and any other pair opens in the comparison tool.
Nearby Match-Ups by Best Writing Elo
Every configuration wrote five drafts for each of the same 10 briefs, from the same prompt. Generation was closed-book, with the prompt as the only source and no web search or other tools. Each judge scores every draft once: Claude Opus 5.5 at medium effort through the Claude Code subscription, GPT-6.1 Sol at medium reasoning through the Codex CLI, GLM 5.3 Flash through OpenRouter, and Jev 1.13, a typed judge from TypeSafe that answers each metric as a multiple-choice question. The channel's finished script is their reference for the voice, and it gets no score on the board itself.
← All comparisons