knowledge-base/raw/xpost/2026-07-02_atomicchat-coding-benchmark-fable5-gpt55-opus48-glm52.md

84 lines
No EOL
3.9 KiB
Markdown
Raw Blame History

This file contains ambiguous Unicode characters

This file contains Unicode characters that might be confused with other characters. If you think that this is intentional, you can safely ignore this warning. Use the Escape button to reveal them.

---
type: xpost
source_url: https://x.com/atomic_chat_hq/status/2072446067962978411
author: "@atomic_chat_hq"
author_name: atomic.chat
posted: 2026-07-01
engagement:
likes: 4005
reposts: 309
quotes: 82
replies: 168
bookmarks: 2028
views: 1730000
posted_by: "@NetLightning"
posted_by_name: Netbits ⚡️ Stachelbanane
posted_by_id: 303303834
posted_in: OME-Gruppe
posted_in_topic: "News & Infos"
posted_date: 2026-07-02
tags: [xpost, coding-benchmark, fable5, gpt-5.5, opus-4.8, glm-5.2, price-performance, one-shot, html5-canvas, physics-simulation, chinese-models, cost-routing]
---
# atomic.chat — Coding Benchmark: Fable 5 vs GPT 5.5 vs Opus 4.8 vs GLM 5.2
## Original Post
> Fable 5 crushed a coding contest, but cost 6x more than Opus 4.8.
>
> 4 models got the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos:
> 1. A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water
> 2. Two cars jumping off ramps and colliding mid-air over a canyon
> 3. A monster truck crushing a row of parked cars
## Results (One-Shot, Same Prompt)
| Model | Tokens | Cost | Grade | Notes |
|-------|--------|------|-------|-------|
| **Fable 5** (Anthropic) | 62,158 | $3.12 | **A+** | Best quality, all three scenes |
| **GPT 5.5** (OpenAI) | 37,753 | $1.14 | A | Close to Fable, beat it on monster truck scene |
| **Opus 4.8** (Anthropic) | 22,280 | $0.56 | — | (Grade not specified in post) |
| **GLM 5.2** (Z.ai) | 36,246 | $0.08 | B+ | Cheapest by far, competitive but didn't win any scene |
## Cost-Performance Matrix
| Metric | Fable 5 | GPT 5.5 | Opus 4.8 | GLM 5.2 |
|--------|---------|---------|----------|---------|
| Cost | $3.12 | $1.14 | $0.56 | **$0.08** |
| Tokens | 62,158 | 37,753 | 22,280 | 36,246 |
| Cost per 1K tokens | $0.050 | $0.030 | $0.025 | **$0.002** |
| vs Fable 5 cost | 1× | 2.7× cheaper | 5.6× cheaper | **39× cheaper** |
| Quality grade | A+ | A | — | B+ |
**Key finding:** GLM 5.2 is **39× cheaper than Fable 5** while remaining competitive (B+ grade). Opus 4.8 is 5.6× cheaper than Fable 5 with lowest token count.
## Key Takeaways from Replies
| User | Takeaway |
|------|----------|
| @Krysoph | GLM 5.2 could be better with more iterations + vision model assistance |
| @suzzvsworld | "GLM at $0.08 and still competitive is the real story. Chinese models are making the price conversation impossible to ignore" |
| @rohanpaul_ai | Quality scales with spend; would love to see test with strict max-token limit |
| @debugging_yami | GPT 5.5 best value — nearly par with Fable at 1/3 cost |
## Context Notes
- **Test type:** One-shot, same prompt, no iteration — measures raw generation quality per dollar
- **Task domain:** HTML5 Canvas physics simulations (derailing train, mid-air car collision, monster truck crushing)
- **Engagement:** 1.73M views, 4K likes, 2K bookmarks — viral resonance indicates market hunger for transparent cost-performance comparisons
- **Narrative:** Reinforces [[../../wiki/concepts/llm/chinese-model-cost-routing.md]] thesis — Chinese models (GLM 5.2) make price-performance conversation impossible to ignore
- **GLM 5.2 at $0.08:** This is the hardest data point yet for the "39× cheaper" narrative. Previous benchmark: DeRonin's 87% cost-cut (5-12× per task). This is 39× on a single task.
## Cross-References
- [[../../wiki/concepts/llm/glm-5.2-zai-coding-model.md]] — GLM 5.2 deep-dive
- [[../../wiki/concepts/llm/chinese-model-cost-routing.md]] — DeRonin's 87% cost-cut playbook
- [[../../wiki/concepts/llm/ai-investment-bubble.md]] — Cost pressure narrative
- [[../../wiki/tools/anthropic-claude.md]] — Fable 5 + Opus 4.8
- [[../../wiki/tools/openai-gpt.md]] — GPT 5.5
- [[../../wiki/concepts/llm/real-world-coding-showdown.md]] — Fahd Mirza's head-to-head methodology
## External Links
- [Original X Post](https://x.com/atomic_chat_hq/status/2072446067962978411)
- [atomic.chat](https://atomic.chat)