Anthropic

Tier S · Ship-to-prod default.

Claude Fable 5

The smartest planner in the roster, but not the worker we trust to finish every build.

Canonical model record

Current identity, limits, and pricing

Provider source · checked 2026-08-14 ↗
Status
Current
API model ID
claude-fable-5
Context
1M
Max output
128K
API price / 1M tokens
$10 input · $50 output

Visual prompt runs

Benchmark runs

Open each generated scene, or compare the same prompt across models.

9 runs

Superbash commentary

Our take

Back to the full tier list →

Fable 5 remains the team’s S-tier choice for raw intelligence, conversation, planning, and difficult architecture. The important operating note is that it can be reluctant to execute and often routes coding work to Opus, so the team uses it as the brain of a workflow rather than assuming it will be the best hands-on builder.

Best for

  • Hard planning and architecture
  • Turning ambiguous goals into a clear spec
  • Difficult first-pass reasoning
  • Talking through consequential decisions

Watch out

  • Can be reluctant to execute
  • Often hands coding work to Opus
  • Premium API pricing
  • Pair important output with human review

Why it is ranked here

  1. The team still describes Fable 5 as the strongest model for raw intelligence and plan mode.
  2. Its practical weakness is execution: the team calls it “lazy” and notes that coding tasks are frequently routed elsewhere.
  3. That planner-versus-worker split keeps it at the top while making the handoff strategy explicit.

Evidence and commentary

2026-08-17

Superbash editorial model ranking

Takeaway: Claude Fable 5 is currently placed in Tier S.

The August 2026 editorial roster places Claude Fable 5 at rank 1.

Open source →
2026-06-17

NEW AI Model Tier List for Vibe Coding!

Takeaway: Fable 5 leads the S tier when access is available.

The source video ranks it as the strongest tested model for difficult coding work, while warning that access is unstable.

Open source →

Official benchmark profile

How Claude Fable 5 scores beyond our visual tests.

Comparable numeric rows from the Anthropic system card and the shared GPT-5.6 comparison table. Marketing-only claims such as ViBench and spreadsheet speedups are excluded unless a score is published.

Anthropic sourceJune 2026Source report →
Coding

SWE-bench Pro

80.0%
Coding

SWE-bench Verified

95.0%
Agentic coding

Terminal-Bench 2.1

84.3%
Full official benchmark table14 rows with source settings and peer charts
BenchmarkAreaScoreSetting / comparison
SWE-bench ProCoding80.0%Average over 5 trials; standard configuration with thinking blocks included.
Claude Fable 580.0%
Claude Opus 4.869.2%
GPT-5.6 Sol64.6%
GPT-5.6 Terra63.4%
GPT-5.6 Luna62.7%
GPT-5.559.4%
Gemini 3.1 Pro54.2%
SWE-bench VerifiedCoding95.0%Average over 5 trials on the 500-problem verified subset.
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic coding84.3%Anthropic mini-SWE-agent harness at high effort; OpenAI’s shared table reports Fable at 83.1%.
GPT-5.6 Sol88.8%
GPT-5.6 Terra87.4%
GPT-5.585.6%
GPT-5.6 Luna84.7%
Claude Fable 584.3%
Claude Opus 4.878.9%
Gemini 3.1 Pro70.7%
FrontierCode DiamondAgentic coding29.3% score / 30.2% passMean@5 at xhigh reasoning effort on Cognition’s Diamond subset.
Claude Fable 529.3% score / 30.2% pass
Claude Opus 4.813.4% score / 14.5% pass
GPT-5.55.7% score / 6.4% pass
FrontierCode MainAgentic coding46.3% score / 48.8% passMean@5 at xhigh reasoning effort on Cognition’s Main subset.
Claude Fable 546.3% score / 48.8% pass
Claude Opus 4.834.3% score / 37.3% pass
GPT-5.525.5% score / 28.2% pass
CursorBenchAgentic coding72.9%Cursor production agent harness at maximum effort.
Claude Fable 572.9%
GPT-5.564.3%
GPQA DiamondAcademic reasoning92.6%Shared GPT-5.6 comparison table.
GPT-5.6 Sol94.6%
Gemini 3.1 Pro94.3%
Claude Mythos 594.1%
GPT-5.593.6%
GPT-5.6 Terra92.9%
Claude Fable 592.6%
GPT-5.6 Luna92.3%
Claude Opus 4.892.0%
FrontierMath Tier 1-3 v2Math87.0%Shared GPT-5.6 comparison table.
GPT-5.6 Sol89.0%
Claude Fable 587.0%
GPT-5.585.3%
GPT-5.6 Terra84.9%
Claude Opus 4.880.0%
GPT-5.6 Luna78.6%
Gemini 3.1 Pro59.6%
FrontierMath Tier 4 v2Math87.8%Shared GPT-5.6 comparison table.
Claude Fable 587.8%
GPT-5.6 Sol83.0%
GPT-5.572.5%
GPT-5.6 Terra68.3%
GPT-5.6 Luna58.5%
Claude Opus 4.856.1%
OSWorld-VerifiedComputer use85.0%Pass@1 averaged over 5 runs on 361 tasks with 100 action steps.
Claude Fable 585.0%
Claude Opus 4.883.4%
GPT-5.578.7%
Gemini 3.5 Flash78.4%
Blueprint-Bench 2Spatial reasoning38.6%Andon Labs standard harness; normalized composite floor-plan score.
Claude Fable 538.6%
GPT-5.536.2%
Gemini 3.5 Flash33.6%
OfficeQA ProDocument reasoning57.9%Databricks image-based OfficeQA Pro evaluation.
Claude Fable 557.9%
GPT-5.552.6%
Claude Opus 4.848.1%
Finance Agent Benchmark v2Finance56.31%Vals AI evaluation with adaptive thinking and max effort.
Claude Fable 556.31%
Claude Opus 4.853.92%
GPT-5.551.76%
MCP AtlasOffice work83.3%Pass rate on real-world MCP tool-use workflows.
Claude Fable 583.3%
Claude Opus 4.882.2%