95% of the posts are people complaining over and over and over about the fucking 3 same topics.

Opus 5 bad

Fable 5 too expensive

Max x20 is a scam

Ok we get it ffs your post is a repost of a repost of a repost of a repost!!

Nothing positive to share ? no experience to share so we can learn something? no fun post? Let's post AGAIN about the VERY SAME TOPIC I saw 10 times this hour!

I truly have no idea what this sub is about frankly.

I'll probably leave soon.

Annoyed by that situation though

So far the ratio that I am seeing is close to 50:1, will think a shit ton, and when I got tired and interrupted it and asked it to write already, on UI no less, it still thinks for another minute or two before actually writing a single line of code, holyfuck is it SLOW as a turtle. Can't vouch for any resulst yet as I've barely done anything with how slow it is

So we will need to use High for Fable 5.1 if we care about our tokens. Question: is 5.1 in High better than 5 on max?

I once hooked up with a hot, married Googler I met online. It's left me with the impression Google HQ has a fun, hookup culture. Googlers, can you sleep with coworkers and still keep your jobs? Other big tech workers, what's the vibe where you are for the 35+ crowd?

Amazon has a super appropriate culture. Also, if he's remotely handsome and older than 35, he's partnered off. It's like working at Amazon wards off divorce. Lucky wives!

Fable 5.1 has repeatedly got itself stuck with really simple tasks, that Fable 5 never did.

See below. It took 2 hours to read the same code over and over and over.

Is anyone else seeing a massive performance drop in Fable 5.1 since its release??

It used to be acceptable, but the enshitification has definitely happened.

It’s basically been lobotomized, and we’re talking amateur backyard ice pick lobotomy by some guy from Tufts.

I’m 99% sure Anthropic has started running a 2-bit quant to save money.

Oh well. I do feel nostalgic for Fable 5.1’s glory days. But subscription cancelled. I’m off to use Codex or Cleverbot (r/cleverbotcode), whichever one has better limits.

No thank you

Don’t forget to drop haiku 5✌️.

Like, 20% higher on most of the major benchmarks? (other than the saturated ones that are already in the 80-90% range I mean)

It's gotta be waaaay beyond what this Fable 5.1 model is scoring, by this point.

Seems like they are probably at least 6 months ahead internally from where Fable 5/Opus 5 is, given that they already had Mythos in February and if anything their rate of improvement and the size of their gap over the field was widening, rather than shrinking, with each passing month, at the time.

So, if they continued at the rate they were going (which, who knows, but seems pretty plausible), they'd probably be at least 6 months past the public-facing Fable stuff at this point, and maybe even more like 8-10 months ahead depending if the rate continued increasing rather than slowing down as far as what's been going on there internally.

Everyone on most of the subs keeps talking about how everyone else (especially China) has "caught up" or "nearly caught up" to Anthropic now, but, I'm assuming the opposite. Their lead is probably even bigger now than it was in February.

The announcement about being able to improve the guardrail accuracy without as much downgrading to lower models happening in incorrect scenarios is interesting.

For a while, my stance was that there will probably be a kind of permanent "intelligence ceiling" that they'll have to place on public-facing models, where no matter how much stronger the labs' internal models keep getting over time, they just keep us permanently flat-lined at basically Mythos/Fable Spring 2026 levels, permanently, because that's the cutoff where once you go above that, it becomes too much of a security risk.

But I suppose, the more I think about it, if the AI gets advanced enough, over time, it might even be able to figure out some way of getting super "smart guardrails" where you still get to have a drastically smarter model than these current models, but with it still managing to stop people from destroying civilization with it.

So, maybe the strength of the public-facing models will start shooting up a lot higher again at some point in 2027, and this will have just been an awkward teething phase where the capability levels of their strongest raw models were outpacing their guardrailing intelligence levels by a wide margin for a while, and then it'll close that gap a bit, in the near future.

ok this is wild. Used Claude Fable 5.1 and said "build me Cities: Skylines in three.js"

Hi!
Since yesterday I had around 20 interventions in a few hours of work with Opus 5 Medium. And every single time I had to intervene and stop it.

It was just re-working on something it made 3 weeks ago because it found so many mistakes made. Then it decided to make new problems.

The model is too verbose. I know they wanna force the watermarking system on us but they want to morph the way we speak and it is a verbose vomit. Even with constraints in clade md file it keeps writing endless nonsense.

Overcomplicates stuff that should be simple and straight forward. I ask for a simple task and it invents 10 different new issues, then I double check with random other models (this case Gemini) and everything's fine.

The current models are pretty bad.

We're introducing Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1, the world's most advanced models for coding and knowledge work.

Fable 5.1 excels at complex, long-running tasks. And its research capabilities offer an early glimpse of how AI models will contribute to scientific progress.

Across our benchmarks, the model sets a new standard. It scores 52.6% on Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1, more than double Fable 5. On Terminal-Bench 4.0, it scores 55.8% against 42.0% for Fable 5. As well as being capable of much higher performance than Fable 5, it can also achieve similar or better results at a much lower cost when set to lower effort levels.

Cache reads with Fable 5.1 cost 75% less than Fable 5's. This reduces the cost of the model in practice by around 25% for typical workloads, and up to 45% for highly agentic ones.

We've also improved our safeguards. Our cybersecurity safeguards now flag benign requests about 60% less often. On basic biology and medical questions, we've recently reduced the fallback rate by around 85%.

Claude Fable 5.1 is available everywhere today. Claude Mythos 5.1, our model for cyberdefenders and life scientists, is available through trusted access programs.

Read more: https://www.anthropic.com/claude-fable-and-mythos-5-1

None of the chats were inside a project, I was using them a few minutes ago and now even recents only show chats from 10 days ago.

And since I'm free I have no right to human support. So do I have to pay a full month to get my chats back?

Thanks in advance.

I was at 90% weekly, even more happy!

well here's a point not in favour of any team: /preview/pre/actual-codex-budget-v0-efjshv1a9vmh1.jpeg?width=640&crop=smart&auto=webp&s=d26c58d565249c117794a54775118da87f5349bf

while anthropic is here 1984ing us about our chocolate ration, codex just silently drops limits. what do? qwen?

feels like reading old english

instead of benchmarks and obscure meterics heres something you can actually visually compare between fable and 5.1. This is something I've been building in blender

LEFT:Concept art
MIDDLE: Fable 5
Right: Fable 5.1

I asked it to improve the structure around the glass, you can see how much more detail and texture it was able to compare. Both middle and right were run on MAX reasoning. Definitely a massive improvement

Look at the amount of usage I am getting per week... I'm barely surviving with me hitting the weekly limits very fast into each week!

We run prompts against a few different providers (OpenAI, Anthropic, some stuff through OpenRouter) depending on the workflow. Every so often something quietly gets worse, the output quality drops, a prompt that worked starts returning junk, or a model gets deprecated and the replacement behaves differently.

Right now we mostly catch it by accident: someone notices, or a customer complains. That feels bad on us, a lot.

How do you all handle this? Do you re-run some kind of fixed eval set on a schedule? Just eyeball it? Have something that alerts you?

Any insights I could use?

Thanks.

Claude Fable 5.1 ( provider Anthropic ) has been added to the AIStupidLevel benchmark and is now included in drift detection.

You’ll see it listed immediately, but scores won’t populate until the next benchmark pass begins. Once that run kicks off, results will update automatically alongside the other models.

https://www.plutonicrainbows.com/posts/2026-09-01-tuesday-not-thursday.html