@ArizePhoenix: - 55.8% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (up from 42.0% for Fable 5) - 52.6% on Terminal-Bench-Science (up from 24.7%) - 65.0% on …

X AI KOLs Following Models

Summary

ArizePhoenix shows significant performance improvements on benchmarks like Terminal-Bench 4.0 and Humanity's Last Exam, with gains from previous versions such as Fable 5.

- 55.8% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (up from 42.0% for Fable 5) - 52.6% on Terminal-Bench-Science (up from 24.7%) - 65.0% on Humanity's Last Exam with tools.
Original Article
View Cached Full Text

Cached at: 09/02/26, 01:49 AM

  • 55.8% on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (up from 42.0% for Fable 5)
  • 52.6% on Terminal-Bench-Science (up from 24.7%)
  • 65.0% on Humanity’s Last Exam with tools.

Similar Articles

Fable 5 below even Gemini 3.1 on Livebench

Reddit r/singularity

A discussion on LiveBench results showing Fable 5 performing below Gemini 3.1, questioning whether the benchmark is flawed or Anthropic is optimizing for benchmarks.

@FinanceYF5: Third-party tests indicate that the returned Fable 5 is not at the same level as the June release. BridgeMind retested the July 1 version with BridgeBench: [Debugging] 86.2→25.9, [Refactoring] 73.6→38.4, [Hallucinat…

X AI KOLs Following

Third-party tests show that after returning, the Fable 5 model's performance dropped significantly on the BridgeBench benchmark. Debugging score fell from 86.2 to 25.9, Refactoring from 73.6 to 38.4, Hallucination from 75.9 to 61.7. It is speculated that the new safety guardrails caused many tasks to be handed off to Opus 4.8.