Opus 5 is considered the most intelligent model[0], while it's half the price of Fable 5[1], and Anthropic is still positioning Fable 5 as the most capable model[2].

Is it because maybe Anthropic engineered Opus 5 to work well on benchmarks and didn't do the same thing to Fable 5, or is there another reason?

[0]: https://artificialanalysis.ai/#intelligence

[1]: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/about-claude/pricing

[2]: https://platform.claude.com/docs/en/about-claude/models/over...

▲

pietz a day ago | parent | next [-]

Benchmarks have gotten great, but they're still a proxy for the real world. The 3 GPT 5.6 models are also further apart in reality than the numbers suggest. That said, I'm still mighty impressed how good Luna is for the price. Highly underrated model.

I have been trying to build something that captures the behavioral element of different models, but it's kinda tough.

▲

dgellow a day ago | parent | prev [-]

That’s what I understand looking at what has been released, but it’s not really clear. The pricing is lower than I expected, I’m wondering what their margin is

▲

hangrybear666 a day ago | parent [-]

By margin you mean how much money they're losing on each request to stay ahead of the curve while investments are still flowing?

▲

Aeolos 14 hours ago | parent | next [-]

I don't know, the CEO of Anthropic has openly said that each model by itself is profitable, they just reinvest everything into training more and more expensive models.

▲

anuramat a day ago | parent | prev [-]

you think they're doing inference at a loss even with the API prices?

	▲	hangrybear666 7 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It just doesn't make sense to me that Opus 5 costs the exact same as Opus 4.8, my bet is that they simply subsidize Opus 5 more comparatively so it still looks as if they are making significant progress to keep investment dollars flowing, further inflating the bubble. I might be completely wrong but I trust nothing their CEO says, he's a habitual doom troll and will say whatever makes marketing sense.