75 lines
No EOL
3.6 KiB
Markdown
75 lines
No EOL
3.6 KiB
Markdown
---
|
||
created: 2026-07-02
|
||
updated: 2026-07-02
|
||
sources: [xpost/2026-07-02_atomicchat-coding-benchmark-fable5-gpt55-opus48-glm52.md, wiki/tools/anthropic-claude.md]
|
||
tags: [concept, llm, fable5, anthropic, coding-model, frontier, premium-pricing, export-controls, cybersecurity, redeployment]
|
||
---
|
||
|
||
# Fable 5 (Anthropic) — Frontier Coding Model, Premium Pricing
|
||
|
||
> **TL;DR:** Anthropic's Fable 5 is the public-facing version of Mythos 5 (cybersecurity-specialized). Redeployed 01.07.2026 with restrictions after June export-control crisis. Frontier coding quality (A+ in one-shot tests), but at **39× the cost of GLM 5.2** — the most expensive frontier model per token in our benchmark data.
|
||
|
||
## Overview
|
||
|
||
| Property | Detail |
|
||
|----------|--------|
|
||
| **Vendor** | Anthropic |
|
||
| **Status** | Redeployed (restricted) — back online 01.07.2026 |
|
||
| **Original launch** | 09.06.2026, blocked 12.06.2026 |
|
||
| **Relation to Mythos 5** | Public version of Mythos 5 (cybersecurity model) |
|
||
| **Pricing** | Premium — $3.12 for 62K tokens in atomic.chat benchmark |
|
||
| **Cost per 1K tokens** | $0.050 (highest in our dataset) |
|
||
| **Quality grade** | A+ (one-shot HTML5 Canvas physics, atomic.chat) |
|
||
|
||
## Export Control Crisis (June 2026)
|
||
|
||
Fable 5 was at the center of the June 2026 export control crisis:
|
||
|
||
1. **09.06.2026:** Fable 5 public launch
|
||
2. **12.06.2026:** Blocked by Trump administration after Amazon researchers jailbroke it via prompt injection
|
||
3. **01.07.2026:** Redeployed with "massive restrictions"
|
||
|
||
See [[../../tools/anthropic-claude.md]] for full timeline and [[../policy/ai-regulation-2026.md]] for regulatory context.
|
||
|
||
## Coding Benchmark Performance (atomic.chat, 01.07.2026)
|
||
|
||
| Metric | Value |
|
||
|--------|-------|
|
||
| Tokens generated | 62,158 |
|
||
| Cost | $3.12 |
|
||
| Grade | **A+** (best in test) |
|
||
| Scenes won | All three (train derailment, mid-air collision, monster truck) |
|
||
| vs GLM 5.2 | 39× more expensive, 2 quality grades higher (A+ vs B+) |
|
||
| vs GPT 5.5 | 2.7× more expensive, 1 quality grade higher (A+ vs A−) |
|
||
| vs Opus 4.8 | 5.6× more expensive (Opus grade unspecified) |
|
||
|
||
**Key finding:** Fable 5 produces the best raw output, but at a cost premium that is **hard to justify** for production use cases where B+ quality is sufficient. The 39× cost spread vs GLM 5.2 is the largest measured in our wiki.
|
||
|
||
> See [[coding-benchmark-price-performance.md]] for full benchmark analysis.
|
||
|
||
## Positioning
|
||
|
||
Fable 5 occupies the **premium frontier** position:
|
||
|
||
| Dimension | Fable 5 | Competition |
|
||
|-----------|---------|-------------|
|
||
| Quality | **A+** (best measured) | GPT 5.5 (A−), GLM 5.2 (B+) |
|
||
| Cost | **Highest** ($3.12/62K) | GLM 5.2 ($0.08/36K) |
|
||
| Access | Restricted (export controls) | GLM 5.2 open-weights (MIT) |
|
||
| Specialization | Cybersecurity (via Mythos 5 lineage) | General coding |
|
||
|
||
**The premium question:** Is A+ worth 39× the cost of B+? For most production use cases, no. For mission-critical, zero-failure-tolerance tasks — possibly. The answer depends on the cost of verification vs. the cost of generation.
|
||
|
||
## Cross-References
|
||
|
||
- [[../../tools/anthropic-claude.md]] — Anthropic Claude family overview, export control timeline
|
||
- [[coding-benchmark-price-performance.md]] — Full atomic.chat benchmark analysis
|
||
- [[../policy/ai-regulation-2026.md]] — Export control regulatory context
|
||
- [[../../people/dario-amodei.md]] — Anthropic CEO, regulatory stance
|
||
- [[glm-5.2-zai-coding-model.md]] — 39× cheaper competitor
|
||
- [[chinese-model-cost-routing.md]] — Cost-routing thesis
|
||
|
||
## External Sources
|
||
|
||
- [atomic.chat benchmark X-Post](https://x.com/atomic_chat_hq/status/2072446067962978411)
|
||
- [Anthropic](https://www.anthropic.com) |