@corbin_braun: wait... Opus 5.5 is better than Fable 5.1? is this true @grok
Summary
A tweet questions if Claude Opus 5.5 outperforms Fable 5.1, referencing Cursor's announcement that Opus 5.5 is now available as the top model on CursorBench with 40% lower costs.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 09/23/26, 08:05 AM
wait…
Opus 5.5 is better than Fable 5.1?
is this true @grok
Cursor (@cursor_ai): Claude Opus 5.5 is now available in Cursor!
It’s the new top model on CursorBench at 57.8% (Max) and costs 40% less per task than Opus 5.
Similar Articles
@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.
Claude Opus 5.5 released matching fable 5.1 and costs 40% less
Claude Opus 5.5 has been released, matching the performance of Fable 5.1 while offering a 40% cost reduction.
@trq212: Opus 5.5 is the result of your feedback. It communicates clearly, it's cheaper per token than Opus 5.0 with the intelli…
Introducing Claude Opus 5.5, the first model in the Claude 5.5 family, which performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 but costs 40% less to run with increased rate limits.
@bentossell: wait… if most people think 5.5 is better than 4.7, i assume that’s due to terminal coding benchmark… 4.8 is still outpe…
The tweet discusses the release of Claude Opus 4.8, which improves upon Opus 4.7 with sharper judgment and longer independent work, though it notes that version 5.5 still outperforms it on a terminal coding benchmark.
Opus 5 isn't much cheaper than Fable to use
Opus 5 is not significantly cheaper to use than Fable.