Live data from Hacker News

Claude Fable 5

anthropic.com

241–250 of 1001 posts

Re: Claude Fable 5

#241

Unrelated, but while the tech of anthropic seems to get more impressive with every passing month, their support has taken a nosedive, sadly. Yet they continue to be the favorite. Model performance is deciding above all else. I used to get a response within 24 hours back in the Claude 1 days. In January 2026, it took 2 weeks. For my latest support inquiry, I've been waiting for over 8 weeks for a response. Eight!

They have support...?

Re: Claude Fable 5

#242
We'll need a lot of good summarization techniques to cut down on the cost of this model. I expect that a common use of Fable 5 is to just do high level direction while delegating literally all work (exploration and implementation) to Opus subagents.

BTW for another discount opportunity, if you reload usage credits on a claude.ai plan at $1000 increments then you get a 30% discount compared to paying API.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#243
gah could model naming be any more confusing?

"Claude Fable 5: a Mythos-class model"

"we're also launching Claude Mythos 5"

what is the 5? how is mythos both a model category and a model name?

Re: Claude Fable 5

#244
post #60

Not missing the forest for the trees, this effectively means in 3-5 months China will drop open source models that are every bit as capable and dangerous as current day Mythos except with no safeguards. And the only companies safe from this are the large corporations that shook hands with Anthropic? Because Fable doesn't seem to have actual safeguards, more like 'if you talk about this you will be talking to Opus.' I…

I wonder where the trees are. In this thread nobody appears to actually be talking about the model.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#246
>During early testing, Stripe reported that Fable 5 compressed months of engineering into days. In a 50-million-line Ruby codebase, the model performed a codebase-wide migration in a day that would otherwise have taken a whole team over two months by hand.

Who is refactoring by hand? This comparison is not relevant in 2026.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#247
I can't justify a pricetag like that when deepseek v4 pro is $0.003625/1M for cache hit, $0.435 for cache miss and $0.87 /1M tokens for output.

For the token cost of explaining some task to Fable, deepseek v4 pro is able to solve the same task many times over.

Re: Claude Fable 5

#248

For those of us on subscription plans: * From today through June 22, Fable 5 is included on Pro, Max, Team, and seat-based Enterprise plans at no extra cost. * On June 23, we’ll remove Fable 5 from those plans. Using it after that will require usage credits. If capacity allows, we’ll extend the included window. * After this point—when sufficient capacity allows us to do so—we aim to restore Fable 5 as a standard part…

I'm about to be priced out of SOTA llms and it's an awful feeling

Re: Claude Fable 5

#249
I use AI for a wide variety of things, of which technical is only a small part - and then it's usually a problem with project configuration, not coding. Why? Because I am often testing projects handed in by students. Projects that supposedly work on their machine, but certainly do not on mine.

Anyway, anecdotally, I find Copilot shockingly awful. It makes random changes to files that have nothing to do with the problem. Call it out, and it makes other changes to other irrelevant files.

ChatGPT and Gemini are both much better. Grok also isn't bad. Claude, I honestly haven't tried yet on these issues. Perhaps I should...

Re: Claude Fable 5

#250
post #53

> On June 23, we’ll remove Fable 5 from those plans. Using it after that will require usage credits. We've entered the phase where only companies will be able to afford state-of-the-art models.

Only companies can afford MRI machines, and that's okay.
Post reply on HN