5 ms·

I think the most important thing here is not absolute performance. It's that organizations now have access to a Fable-ish model without Fable's 30-day data rete

I think the most important thing here is not absolute performance. It's that organizations now have access to a Fable-ish model without Fable's 30-day data retention requirement[0]. > "Consistent with prior Opus models, Opus 5 does not have data retention requirements for general access."[1] On the Opus model release page, the reason why Fable doesn't have an ARC-AGI score is because of that retention policy[2]. 0: https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15425996-data-retention-practices-for-covered-models https://support.claude.com/en/articles/15425996-data-retenti... 1: https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-5 https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-opus-5 2: https://xcancel.com/arcprize/status/2064399134099153344 https://xcancel.com/arcprize/status/2064399134099153344

krzyk 2mo ago
And to the guardrails of Fable: https://x.com/cheatyyyy/status/2080693704290140330 https://x.com/cheatyyyy/status/2080693704290140330
- kodablah 2mo ago
  That tweet says: > Opus 5 can silently fallback to Opus 4.8 (without any notice) on the serverside if you hit a guardrail But https://support.claude.com/en/articles/16049681-why-claude-switched-models-in-your-conversation-with-opus-5 https://support.claude.com/en/articles/16049681-why-claude-s... says (emphasis mine): > These checks cause Claude to _visibly_ fallback from Opus 5 to Opus 4.8 [...] You'll see a notice explaining that the model switched, and the response will be labeled with the model that answered. So who is right? I know for Fable I am visibly told, is this tweet trying to say it is silent against what Anthropic is saying?
  - solenoid0937 2mo ago
    Is some random guy on Twitter right, or official support docs that explicitly describe this scenario?
    - pseudohadamard 2mo ago
      If it was Microsoft then definitely some random guy on Twitter. For Anthropic, it's more a 50:50 toss-up.
    - PunchyHamster 2mo ago
      Having a bit too much trust in AI companies have we ?
  - SwellJoe 2mo ago
    So, announcing the fallback is better than doing it silently, but the fact that Fable falls back frequently for the kind of work I do (a lot of security oriented stuff lately, but it falls back on seemingly random stuff, sometimes, too), means I reach for it less. Getting interrupted mid-task makes it much less valuable. If I have any suspicion I'm going to hit the guardrails, I'll use something else.
    - pseudohadamard 2mo ago
      Same problem here, I seem to hit guardrails all the time when doing code audits. Does anyone have any insight over whether they're less annoying in Opus 5 than Fable? That is, is it better to start with Opus 5 than Fable because you'll get kicked backed to Opus 4.8 less often? There also seems to be some cross-pollination across models, going Fable, Fable, Fable, guardrail, Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, ... gives more Fable-like results from Opus than just Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, ...
      - pseudohadamard 2mo ago
        Played with it for a couple of hours now, I'd say it's slightly better than Fable for coding and so far I haven't hit any guardrails while I'd hit them all the time with Fable.
  - lossolo 2mo ago
    It's showing you're switched to 4.8, i just hit that while doing security research.
  - trueno 2mo ago
    i wonder if anyone thinks im weird for still using 4.6 lmao it's my "good enough" model. im more than pleased at what i can whip up with 4.6, once local llm's get here with a decent sized context window and it feels like using 4.6, i shall depart the land of these dumb service subscriptions
- krzyk 2mo ago
  And that one was funny: https://x.com/i/status/2080697793023483928 https://x.com/i/status/2080697793023483928
doctorpangloss 2mo ago
do you mean, that organizations now have access to Fable-ish pelican drawing?
- trueno 2mo ago
  at last. time to lay off 22,000 employees
arrowleaf 2mo ago
> Updated over 2 weeks ago I hope we get clarification on this, I can't find anything claiming that it is compatible with ZDR.
- collinrapp 2mo ago
  Maybe I’m misunderstanding you, but if you scroll to the bottom of their [1] link to the Opus 5 announcement, under “Getting started,” it explicitly says: > Consistent with prior Opus models, Opus 5 does not have data retention requirements for general access.
- solenoid0937 2mo ago
  It's in the article.
alvis 2mo ago
Also the cost per task. It appears to be significantly cheaper, cheaper than sonnet!
- qsera 2mo ago
  I can't help but read these comments in the voice of a TV commercial....
  - iambateman 2mo ago
    Ask your doctor if Opus 5 is right for you. Side effects include occasional hallucination, security breaches and unwanted React apps. Some developers have reported receiving entire apps from untrained executives who may or may not know what they’re doing. Stop using Opus immediately if you experience signs of dizziness or vomiting. Opus 5…the people’s favorite.
    - ahofmann 2mo ago
      Spot on! Comment of the month, I'd say.
    - a012 2mo ago
      But … but … but 9 out of 10 doctors recommended Opus
    - andrekandre 2mo ago
      > and unwanted React apps stares at codex "native" app that is actually react/electron [0] [0] https://www.kitze.io/posts/codex-electron-app-technical-breakdown https://www.kitze.io/posts/codex-electron-app-technical-brea...
    - silverlimetea 2mo ago
      > unwanted React apps Treat like acne - target the Node and .pop() to eject
- x313 2mo ago
  The numbers from Anthropic seem heavily cherry-picked, Artificial Analysis has Opus 5 at 1.25x the cost of Sonnet and 2x the cost of GPT 5.6 and K3. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?cost=cost-per-task https://artificialanalysis.ai/?cost=cost-per-task
hnscum 2mo ago
[dead]
abixb 2mo ago
So the rumors were right, Opus 5 was indeed being polished up for release. Huge improvements in GDPval-AA v2 too -- great for some of the knowledge work-based agentic workloads I run. Also glad they still kepy Fable 5 on "credits only" access. I think we're going to start seeing model providers gate top-of-the-line models behind pay-as-you-go API rates/credits while subsidizing other models on monthly subscriptions.
- Wowfunhappy 2mo ago
  Fable 5 is still included in Max subscriptions!
  - collabs 2mo ago
    Max is an individual subscription though and does not come with the guarantees that team or enterprise do?
    - ValentineC 2mo ago
      Team Premium has Fable 5 too.
      - eterm 2mo ago
        And Teams Premium was previously needed for any claude-code at all.
        eterm 2mo ago
        I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted, in November last year, the regular teams tier did not let you use claude code, premium was required. They've changed it since, but that's why I said "previously".
      - bakies 2mo ago
        Doesn't team bill API rates?
gigatexal 2mo ago
insane pricing: " Claude Opus 5 is available today on all platforms, priced at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens (the same as Opus 4.8)"
- RazorBucksICO 2mo ago
  I think for the value of the outputs that’s still a good deal. Keeping the same price as the prior model makes sense to me. That is if the model size is about the same in the cost to serve has not substantially changed. Now I would have expected efficiency gains for inference, but there is no way to know as a customer. At the end of the day, they have established a strong brand and if they can get away with a 95%+ gross margin on inference entirely from the status premium, then I suppose that’s good for them. Apple does the same thing, and I don’t fault them for it.
- oblio 2mo ago
  Why is it insane if it's the same as the previous version?
- gigatexal 2mo ago
  "insane" that they kept the price the same and didn't jack it up, my bad for the ambiguity.
gonzalohm 2mo ago
I don't understand how the data retention works. My company has an enterprise license with no data retention but if I ask Claude about past conversations, it remembers. So surely the information is being stored somewhere
- bathtub365 2mo ago
  Likely in memory files stored locally
  - gonzalohm 2mo ago
    I'm talking about the website. It's not local because I can see my chats in any device
    - usef- 2mo ago
      Yes, all chat interfaces store the history as it's part of the UI promise (unless you open an incognito chat) and is fully server side. When people talk about retention they mean API usage and terminal agents, which run on your device.
- persedes 2mo ago
  You most likely are referring to the local jsonl files where claude has your sessions etc stored.
  - mh- 2mo ago
    It could just be the memory features. In my enterprise-seated account I see slightly different options available (vs. my personal account) in the Capabilities section: Search and reference chats Allow Claude to search for relevant details in past chats. Generate memory from chat history (Legacy) Allow Claude to remember relevant context from your chats. Memory includes your entire chat history with Claude. The first option was defaulted to on, if I recall.
    - 2mo ago
khuzaimsharif 2mo ago
[flagged]
fny 2mo ago
Anthropic offered ZDR for Fable on AWS bedrock from the beginning.
- cjonas 2mo ago
  Really? I was unable to use it in our account without having to enable the provider_data_share setting... From the docs[0]: > To use this model, you must opt in to provider data sharing by setting your data retention mode to provider_data_share via the Data Retention API 0: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/bedrock/latest/userguide/model-card-anthropic-claude-fable-5.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/bedrock/latest/userguide/model-c...
  - fny 2mo ago
    Yes. You need ZDR at the account level first. Contact your AWS rep. I have done this a few times for customer deployments.
bluegatty 2mo ago
It's not that important in most cases, but yes, on the aggregate, it's a concern
- abofh 2mo ago
  It's a binary rule at our firm. We trust bedrock but not mantle for similar reasons
  - bluegatty 2mo ago
    Yes, that's valid, I'm sure it's a dealbraker in some situations.
  - holler 2mo ago
    why not mantle? - I was confused why mantle exists over normal bedrock
pseudohadamard 2mo ago
Never even registered that that existed, the only thing I care about is whether I keep hitting the &#$&# guardrails that Fable has. They can keep the data forever as far as I'm concerned, just stop kicking me back to Opus.

krzyk 2mo ago

And to the guardrails of Fable: https://x.com/cheatyyyy/status/2080693704290140330 https://x.com/cheatyyyy/status/2080693704290140330

kodablah 2mo ago
That tweet says: > Opus 5 can silently fallback to Opus 4.8 (without any notice) on the serverside if you hit a guardrail But https://support.claude.com/en/articles/16049681-why-claude-switched-models-in-your-conversation-with-opus-5 https://support.claude.com/en/articles/16049681-why-claude-s... says (emphasis mine): > These checks cause Claude to _visibly_ fallback from Opus 5 to Opus 4.8 [...] You'll see a notice explaining that the model switched, and the response will be labeled with the model that answered. So who is right? I know for Fable I am visibly told, is this tweet trying to say it is silent against what Anthropic is saying?
- solenoid0937 2mo ago
  Is some random guy on Twitter right, or official support docs that explicitly describe this scenario?
  - pseudohadamard 2mo ago
    If it was Microsoft then definitely some random guy on Twitter. For Anthropic, it's more a 50:50 toss-up.
  - PunchyHamster 2mo ago
    Having a bit too much trust in AI companies have we ?
- SwellJoe 2mo ago
  So, announcing the fallback is better than doing it silently, but the fact that Fable falls back frequently for the kind of work I do (a lot of security oriented stuff lately, but it falls back on seemingly random stuff, sometimes, too), means I reach for it less. Getting interrupted mid-task makes it much less valuable. If I have any suspicion I'm going to hit the guardrails, I'll use something else.
  - pseudohadamard 2mo ago
    Same problem here, I seem to hit guardrails all the time when doing code audits. Does anyone have any insight over whether they're less annoying in Opus 5 than Fable? That is, is it better to start with Opus 5 than Fable because you'll get kicked backed to Opus 4.8 less often? There also seems to be some cross-pollination across models, going Fable, Fable, Fable, guardrail, Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, ... gives more Fable-like results from Opus than just Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, Opus 4.8, ...
    - pseudohadamard 2mo ago
      Played with it for a couple of hours now, I'd say it's slightly better than Fable for coding and so far I haven't hit any guardrails while I'd hit them all the time with Fable.
- lossolo 2mo ago
  It's showing you're switched to 4.8, i just hit that while doing security research.
- trueno 2mo ago
  i wonder if anyone thinks im weird for still using 4.6 lmao it's my "good enough" model. im more than pleased at what i can whip up with 4.6, once local llm's get here with a decent sized context window and it feels like using 4.6, i shall depart the land of these dumb service subscriptions
krzyk 2mo ago
And that one was funny: https://x.com/i/status/2080697793023483928 https://x.com/i/status/2080697793023483928

doctorpangloss 2mo ago

do you mean, that organizations now have access to Fable-ish pelican drawing?

trueno 2mo ago
at last. time to lay off 22,000 employees

arrowleaf 2mo ago

> Updated over 2 weeks ago I hope we get clarification on this, I can't find anything claiming that it is compatible with ZDR.

collinrapp 2mo ago
Maybe I’m misunderstanding you, but if you scroll to the bottom of their [1] link to the Opus 5 announcement, under “Getting started,” it explicitly says: > Consistent with prior Opus models, Opus 5 does not have data retention requirements for general access.
solenoid0937 2mo ago
It's in the article.

alvis 2mo ago

Also the cost per task. It appears to be significantly cheaper, cheaper than sonnet!

qsera 2mo ago
I can't help but read these comments in the voice of a TV commercial....
- iambateman 2mo ago
  Ask your doctor if Opus 5 is right for you. Side effects include occasional hallucination, security breaches and unwanted React apps. Some developers have reported receiving entire apps from untrained executives who may or may not know what they’re doing. Stop using Opus immediately if you experience signs of dizziness or vomiting. Opus 5…the people’s favorite.
  - ahofmann 2mo ago
    Spot on! Comment of the month, I'd say.
  - a012 2mo ago
    But … but … but 9 out of 10 doctors recommended Opus
  - andrekandre 2mo ago
    > and unwanted React apps stares at codex "native" app that is actually react/electron [0] [0] https://www.kitze.io/posts/codex-electron-app-technical-breakdown https://www.kitze.io/posts/codex-electron-app-technical-brea...
  - silverlimetea 2mo ago
    > unwanted React apps Treat like acne - target the Node and .pop() to eject
x313 2mo ago
The numbers from Anthropic seem heavily cherry-picked, Artificial Analysis has Opus 5 at 1.25x the cost of Sonnet and 2x the cost of GPT 5.6 and K3. https://artificialanalysis.ai/?cost=cost-per-task https://artificialanalysis.ai/?cost=cost-per-task

hnscum 2mo ago

[dead]

abixb 2mo ago

So the rumors were right, Opus 5 was indeed being polished up for release. Huge improvements in GDPval-AA v2 too -- great for some of the knowledge work-based agentic workloads I run. Also glad they still kepy Fable 5 on "credits only" access. I think we're going to start seeing model providers gate top-of-the-line models behind pay-as-you-go API rates/credits while subsidizing other models on monthly subscriptions.

Wowfunhappy 2mo ago
Fable 5 is still included in Max subscriptions!
- collabs 2mo ago
  Max is an individual subscription though and does not come with the guarantees that team or enterprise do?
  - ValentineC 2mo ago
    Team Premium has Fable 5 too.
    - eterm 2mo ago
      And Teams Premium was previously needed for any claude-code at all.
      - eterm 2mo ago
        I'm not sure why I'm being downvoted, in November last year, the regular teams tier did not let you use claude code, premium was required. They've changed it since, but that's why I said "previously".
    - bakies 2mo ago
      Doesn't team bill API rates?

gigatexal 2mo ago

insane pricing: " Claude Opus 5 is available today on all platforms, priced at $5 per million input tokens and $25 per million output tokens (the same as Opus 4.8)"

RazorBucksICO 2mo ago
I think for the value of the outputs that’s still a good deal. Keeping the same price as the prior model makes sense to me. That is if the model size is about the same in the cost to serve has not substantially changed. Now I would have expected efficiency gains for inference, but there is no way to know as a customer. At the end of the day, they have established a strong brand and if they can get away with a 95%+ gross margin on inference entirely from the status premium, then I suppose that’s good for them. Apple does the same thing, and I don’t fault them for it.
oblio 2mo ago
Why is it insane if it's the same as the previous version?
gigatexal 2mo ago
"insane" that they kept the price the same and didn't jack it up, my bad for the ambiguity.

gonzalohm 2mo ago

I don't understand how the data retention works. My company has an enterprise license with no data retention but if I ask Claude about past conversations, it remembers. So surely the information is being stored somewhere

bathtub365 2mo ago
Likely in memory files stored locally
- gonzalohm 2mo ago
  I'm talking about the website. It's not local because I can see my chats in any device
  - usef- 2mo ago
    Yes, all chat interfaces store the history as it's part of the UI promise (unless you open an incognito chat) and is fully server side. When people talk about retention they mean API usage and terminal agents, which run on your device.
persedes 2mo ago
You most likely are referring to the local jsonl files where claude has your sessions etc stored.
- mh- 2mo ago
  It could just be the memory features. In my enterprise-seated account I see slightly different options available (vs. my personal account) in the Capabilities section: Search and reference chats Allow Claude to search for relevant details in past chats. Generate memory from chat history (Legacy) Allow Claude to remember relevant context from your chats. Memory includes your entire chat history with Claude. The first option was defaulted to on, if I recall.
  - 2mo ago

khuzaimsharif 2mo ago

[flagged]

fny 2mo ago

Anthropic offered ZDR for Fable on AWS bedrock from the beginning.

cjonas 2mo ago
Really? I was unable to use it in our account without having to enable the provider_data_share setting... From the docs[0]: > To use this model, you must opt in to provider data sharing by setting your data retention mode to provider_data_share via the Data Retention API 0: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/bedrock/latest/userguide/model-card-anthropic-claude-fable-5.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/bedrock/latest/userguide/model-c...
- fny 2mo ago
  Yes. You need ZDR at the account level first. Contact your AWS rep. I have done this a few times for customer deployments.

bluegatty 2mo ago

It's not that important in most cases, but yes, on the aggregate, it's a concern

abofh 2mo ago
It's a binary rule at our firm. We trust bedrock but not mantle for similar reasons
- bluegatty 2mo ago
  Yes, that's valid, I'm sure it's a dealbraker in some situations.
- holler 2mo ago
  why not mantle? - I was confused why mantle exists over normal bedrock

pseudohadamard 2mo ago

Never even registered that that existed, the only thing I care about is whether I keep hitting the &#$&# guardrails that Fable has. They can keep the data forever as far as I'm concerned, just stop kicking me back to Opus.