| ▲ | varispeed 5 hours ago | |||||||
If Fable gets correct answer quicker, then you might pay less than doing back and forth with Opus, plus you lose more of your own time. I see no reason for using less able models in my workflows. There is this saying, penny wise and pound foolish | ||||||||
| ▲ | SubiculumCode 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | |||||||
same as it ever was. It seems your argument implies a belief that you should always use the best model. Others think that not all tasks require the absolute most powerful, expensive, model. | ||||||||
| ▲ | sambaumann 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
The CursorBench plot, for example, shows that fable does have slightly better performance, but Opus is pretty close, and is less expensive per task | ||||||||
| ▲ | stuartjohnson12 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | |||||||
fable on longer coding tasks with fable subagents will easily chew through hundreds of dollars in a single run. | ||||||||
| ||||||||
| ▲ | 8note 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | |||||||
less expensive per task might also mean less of your own time | ||||||||