[TLDR] The problem isn’t even that GPT5.6 is cheaper than Fable, it’s just straight up better. [via r/Anthropic]

OP : u/Gym_frere

Obviously from a usage/token point of view, Sol is better than Fable, but it’s also just straight up better. I asked Sol and Fable (both on High) to implement a feature that I needed to add to my app. Sol was able to plan and implement it end to end with no problems whatsoever. Asked Fable to do the same thing and its work was riddled with mistakes - I do use AI for coding but I am a software engineer so I personally audit every production from AI. To add insult to injury, I hit my usage limit not once, but TWICE with Fable while implementing this feature. Sol was able to do it with less than 40% usage.

So to recap, Fable was allegedly nerfed, it makes tonnes of mistakes, is way more expensive, and burns through tokens extremely quickly.

I think like over the last 3-12 months Anthropic was ahead of OpenAI but they’ve fallen behind now.

URL of original post : https://www.reddit.com/r/Anthropic/comments/1utrfkf/the_problem_isnt_even_that_gpt56_is_cheaper_than/

TL;DR of the discussion on r/Anthropic for this post generated automatically after 100 comments.

Current source-thread comment count seen by the bot: 162.

The consensus is split, with many users disagreeing with OP's claim that GPT-5.6 Sol is "straight up better" than Fable. While some agree Sol is more efficient with tokens and better for execution/review, others find Fable superior for planning, architecture, and general coding, even if it uses more tokens. Several users report Fable performing better overall and catching their mistakes, while Sol has been surprisingly token-hungry for them. There's also a sentiment that Anthropic might be falling behind OpenAI in practical use cases, though some still champion Claude for design and frontend code. A few commenters suggest the perceived differences might be due to LLM temperature settings or subjective experiences.