@danshipper: This is wrong, it’s the same model But it does fall back to Opud 4.8 slightly more, so the benchmarks are measuring a m…
Summary
Dan Shipper argues that the Fable 5 model is not nerfed but falls back to Opus 4.8 more often, causing mixed benchmark results, contrary to claims of severe degradation.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 07/03/26, 10:41 PM
This is wrong, it’s the same model
But it does fall back to Opud 4.8 slightly more, so the benchmarks are measuring a mix of Fable and Opus
Skill issue
ℏεsam (@Hesamation): Fable 5 isn’t nerfed, it’s SLAUGHTERED.
the problem isn’t even the model itself, but the hard guardrails Anthropic has set in place.
Similar Articles
ProgramBench result for Fable 5 is in, doubling Opus 4.8 even with 4.8 fallback "99% of the runs"
ProgramBench results show Fable 5 achieving double the performance of Opus 4.8, even with fallback to 4.8 in 99% of runs.
@robinebers: Fable 5 Low > Opus 4.8 Max
A user posts a comparison suggesting Fable 5 Low outperforms Opus 4.8 Max, with another user commenting that Fable 5 is back but being used incorrectly.
@0xSero: Anyone else notice opus-4.8 is worse than it was on launch? They chopped him.
User observes that the opus-4.8 model has degraded in performance since its launch.
Opus 4.7 scores lower than 4.6 and 4.5 on SimpleBench
Claude Opus 4.7 shows decreased performance compared to versions 4.6 and 4.5 on SimpleBench evaluation.
Differences Between Opus 4.7 and Opus 4.8 on MineBench
Opus 4.8 shows improved build quality and lower cost compared to Opus 4.7 on the MineBench 3D block-structure benchmark, though with some inconsistencies. The model demonstrates streamlined thinking and more efficient inference.