Remix.run Logo
dannyw 2 hours ago

Impressions from testing Fable 5 prior to launch:

• My most noticeable immediate jump was in how its frontend design was much more intentionally crafted, and delightful without feeling like 'AI vibe coded'; with better end-user usability too.

• In some internal agentic harnesses, it achieved better results with about half the tokens, making it cost the ~same as Opus 4.8 price-wise! The real price increase is less than 2x; with biggest differences in harder problems where Opus 4.8 struggles (or needs many turns).

• Part of the token efficiency improvements come from Fable doing more targeted and surgical diffs, with less non-necessary changes. This is great, because PRs often have less LoC changes for review. It writes more maintainable code without explicit human steering.

• For general conversation and assistant style use cases, didn’t really notice a difference vs 4.8.

• 1M context window, without increased pricing for long context is AWESOME. This is a massive win.

• The classifiers are super aggressive and sensitive and this does happen for very benign, non-security coding tasks. Fallbacks to 4.8 worked like a charm; but the filters are definitely super sensitive.

Overall, I would describe this as a step change and worthy of the "Claude 5" model name. It did take some time to understand the intelligence ceiling of this model; and even with an extended testing window I'm still discovering new things and often surprised (in a good way) by the model.

bottlepalm an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I just ran it on a tough reverse engineering problem I'm having that neither Claude Code 4.8 or ChatGPT Codex 5.5 could figure out. 30 minutes later Fable has it all figured out perfectly.

cedws 18 minutes ago | parent | next [-]

How did it not immediately flag that up? Are you sure it wasn’t being silently routed to Opus?

derangedHorse 27 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-]

For hard problems you’ll have to use the GPT 5.5 pro model (available via api if you don’t want to spend $100 on the monthly subscription)

skerit 35 minutes ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh nice, it didn't flag the request? I feared any reverse engineering would become impossible because of the new safeguards.

InsideOutSanta an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

After running it for half an hour: it's incredibly good at the visual aspects of UI design.

tsunamifury 19 minutes ago | parent [-]

"incredibly" is doing a ton of work here. I do not think its doing even moderate work on visual design, but it can spew out a lot of ui that looks arranged ... ok.

This is still not in the range of shippable UI for top end companies. Maybe for internal tools and enterprise.

At our comapny we limit to protoypes at most and even find it limited there.

morley an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Can I ask how you gained preview access to Fable 5?

kakugawa an hour ago | parent | next [-]

I didn't see Fable 5 in the `/model` list, until I ran it with: `$ claude --model fable-5`

swyx an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-]

he works on evals at canva

dannyw 36 minutes ago | parent [-]

Yep. We have some interesting problems, like getting LLMs to create/edit Canva designs in our own proprietary format, which isn’t published or documented on the web. So the model has to work with it, purely from a very detailed system prompt spec / in-context learning.

I assume it might be a good barometer for generalised intelligence; esp in the visual space.

mvdtnz an hour ago | parent | prev [-]

[flagged]

an hour ago | parent | prev [-]
[deleted]