正在加载视频...

视频加载失败

加载此视频时出现问题。这可能是由于临时网络问题，或视频可能不可用。

Fable 5.1 orchestrates GPT-5.6 Luna agents. Via the 'fable-advisor' plugin for Claude Code. 1. Fable 5.1 orchestrates 2. GPT-5.6 Luna implements 3. Fable 5.1 reviews Think of it like in-context distillation: give Luna the intelligence of Fable 5.1 at a fraction the cost.

Dan McAteer

29,904 subscribers

145,795 次观看 • 1 天前 •via X (Twitter)

科学技术教育游戏

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 条评论

暂无评论

原始帖子的评论将显示在这里

相关视频

You can use Grok Bot with Fable 5.1 and it’s extremely easy to set up - fable 5.1 plans in cursor cloud agents - grok 4.6 writes the code in cursor - cursor cloud agents ship it

You can use Grok Bot with Fable 5.1 and it’s extremely easy to set up - fable 5.1 plans in cursor cloud agents - grok 4.6 writes the code in cursor - cursor cloud agents ship it

0xMarioNawfal

47,050 次观看 • 1 天前

holy sh*t this is f**king dangerous A Chinese guy figured out how to run fable 5.1 for FREE on gpt 5.6 luna subagents on every task You’ll never hit an agent usage limit how you set it up (3 mins) 1. install the 'fable-orchestrator' repo 2. type /fable orchestrator [task] 3. done, that's it Give this to your agent immediately. It’s the best thing you can do this week.

holy sh*t this is f**king dangerous A Chinese guy figured out how to run fable 5.1 for FREE on gpt 5.6 luna subagents on every task You’ll never hit an agent usage limit how you set it up (3 mins) 1. install the 'fable-orchestrator' repo 2. type /fable orchestrator [task] 3. done, that's it Give this to your agent immediately. It’s the best thing you can do this week.

painn

297,244 次观看 • 1 天前

Fable 5.1 charges 6× more than GPT-5.6 Sol anthropic's Fable 5.1 went live. we threw it straight at openai's GPT-5.6 Sol. same prompts, one shot. the test: five self-contained three.js scenes, one continuous project — a futuristic mansion on a private island. exterior orbit, grand hall with a diamond chandelier, pool with a water park, garage with 10 lambos, helicopter landing on the roof cost: Claude Fable 5.1 — $5.69 GPT-5.6 Sol — $0.88 what we saw: • fable goes for realism — waves, depth, a sand ring around the island. sol goes low-poly and clean, and its style never breaks across all 5 scenes • fable's chandelier is thousands of individual crystals. sol's hall is honestly just a staircase and a wall • fable's helicopter touches down on the lit helipad much smoother than sol's • fable built a triple-slide water-park tower — and shipped the pool with no water. sol's park is tiny — but the pool is full 6× the price buys you 6× the detail — and the same one-shot bugs. what's your choice? try Fable 5.1 on aimlapi[.]com

Fable 5.1 charges 6× more than GPT-5.6 Sol anthropic's Fable 5.1 went live. we threw it straight at openai's GPT-5.6 Sol. same prompts, one shot. the test: five self-contained three.js scenes, one continuous project — a futuristic mansion on a private island. exterior orbit, grand hall with a diamond chandelier, pool with a water park, garage with 10 lambos, helicopter landing on the roof cost: Claude Fable 5.1 — $5.69 GPT-5.6 Sol — $0.88 what we saw: • fable goes for realism — waves, depth, a sand ring around the island. sol goes low-poly and clean, and its style never breaks across all 5 scenes • fable's chandelier is thousands of individual crystals. sol's hall is honestly just a staircase and a wall • fable's helicopter touches down on the lit helipad much smoother than sol's • fable built a triple-slide water-park tower — and shipped the pool with no water. sol's park is tiny — but the pool is full 6× the price buys you 6× the detail — and the same one-shot bugs. what's your choice? try Fable 5.1 on aimlapi[.]com

AI/ML API

394,577 次观看 • 2 天前

Claude Fable 5.1 ONE SHOTTED this Mario Kart game. This is one of the best results I've had so far and I am SUPER impressed with the game development capabilities. Fable 5.1 is a huge step up from Fable 5.

Claude Fable 5.1 ONE SHOTTED this Mario Kart game. This is one of the best results I've had so far and I am SUPER impressed with the game development capabilities. Fable 5.1 is a huge step up from Fable 5.

BridgeMind

1,110,935 次观看 • 2 天前

We’re introducing Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1. They're the world’s most advanced models for coding and knowledge work.

We’re introducing Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Mythos 5.1. They're the world’s most advanced models for coding and knowledge work.

Claude

19,755,228 次观看 • 2 天前

This test shows clearly why GPT 5.6 Sol wins I asked the simplest prompt ever : > Create a gmail clone, the nearest possible to the real gmail ui You can see the result, GPT 5.6 Sol and Fable make a 100% perfect But here's the price difference: → GPT 5.6 Terra: $1.04 - 8 minutes → GPT 5.6 Luna: $0.44 - 10 minutes → GPT 5.6 Sol: $6.72 - 20 minutes → Claude Fable 5: $25.09 - 40 minutes Fable is 3.7x more expensive than Sol for "the same result"

This test shows clearly why GPT 5.6 Sol wins I asked the simplest prompt ever : > Create a gmail clone, the nearest possible to the real gmail ui You can see the result, GPT 5.6 Sol and Fable make a 100% perfect But here's the price difference: → GPT 5.6 Terra: $1.04 - 8 minutes → GPT 5.6 Luna: $0.44 - 10 minutes → GPT 5.6 Sol: $6.72 - 20 minutes → Claude Fable 5: $25.09 - 40 minutes Fable is 3.7x more expensive than Sol for "the same result"

Melvyn • Builder

22,254 次观看 • 1 个月前

I WAS WRONG, FABLE-5.1 MIGHT ACTUALLY BE THE BEST MODEL TO EXIST ON THIS PLANET FOR FRONTEND TOO 😭 Tried recreating the exact same game with Fable-5.1 and Kimi K3. Fable-5.1 outclassed Kimi K3 on UI and gameplay. Smoother mechanics, better interactions, and noticeably more polished overall. Kimi was still competitive, especially with way fewer jitters during gameplay. Cost: - Kimi K3: ~$11 - Fable-5.1: ~$18 That’s ~60% more cost for Fable, but the quality difference was actually noticeable. Kimi is still ridiculously competitive for the price.

I WAS WRONG, FABLE-5.1 MIGHT ACTUALLY BE THE BEST MODEL TO EXIST ON THIS PLANET FOR FRONTEND TOO 😭 Tried recreating the exact same game with Fable-5.1 and Kimi K3. Fable-5.1 outclassed Kimi K3 on UI and gameplay. Smoother mechanics, better interactions, and noticeably more polished overall. Kimi was still competitive, especially with way fewer jitters during gameplay. Cost: - Kimi K3: ~$11 - Fable-5.1: ~$18 That’s ~60% more cost for Fable, but the quality difference was actually noticeable. Kimi is still ridiculously competitive for the price.

aditya

279,932 次观看 • 2 天前

Built a villa scene in Blender with Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 Astra This is what it built

Built a villa scene in Blender with Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 Astra This is what it built

Karan

1,429,635 次观看 • 12 小时前

We are officially in the era where one prompt can ship a complete playable game in <50 bucks! Asked Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol to clone Terraria, max effort level Both are playable and offer a smooth experience GPT 5.6 Sol did it at roughly 1/4 the cost and in 2/3 the runtime: - GPT 5.6 Sol: ~$35, ~1h 20m - Claude Fable 5: ~$120, ~2h Tho Fable still produced the strongest results 🥲

We are officially in the era where one prompt can ship a complete playable game in <50 bucks! Asked Claude Fable 5 and GPT 5.6 Sol to clone Terraria, max effort level Both are playable and offer a smooth experience GPT 5.6 Sol did it at roughly 1/4 the cost and in 2/3 the runtime: - GPT 5.6 Sol: ~$35, ~1h 20m - Claude Fable 5: ~$120, ~2h Tho Fable still produced the strongest results 🥲

GMI Cloud

130,438 次观看 • 1 个月前

Claude Fable 5 is best used as an orchestrator that does the heavy reasoning and delegates token intensive but simpler tasks to cheaper models. 'fable-advisor' is your free and open-source plugin that does exactly that. New in fable-advisor: > A directive to Fable to minimize its own token usage (works surprisingly well) > GPT-5.5 as an implementer sub-agent via the Codex CLI (uses your ChatGPT sub so you don't pay extra) How to use it: 1. claude plugin marketplace add DannyMac180/fable-advisor && claude plugin install fable-advisor 2. /model fable

Claude Fable 5 is best used as an orchestrator that does the heavy reasoning and delegates token intensive but simpler tasks to cheaper models. 'fable-advisor' is your free and open-source plugin that does exactly that. New in fable-advisor: > A directive to Fable to minimize its own token usage (works surprisingly well) > GPT-5.5 as an implementer sub-agent via the Codex CLI (uses your ChatGPT sub so you don't pay extra) How to use it: 1. claude plugin marketplace add DannyMac180/fable-advisor && claude plugin install fable-advisor 2. /model fable

Dan McAteer

56,732 次观看 • 2 个月前

I tested Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 I gave 3 same prompts to both, here are the results IMO, both created beautiful scenes, but the color picking problem is still there in Fable 5.1. Kimi K3 is better at this. Fable: ~$12/scene | Kimi: <$5/scene More tests coming up

I tested Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 I gave 3 same prompts to both, here are the results IMO, both created beautiful scenes, but the color picking problem is still there in Fable 5.1. Kimi K3 is better at this. Fable: ~$12/scene | Kimi: <$5/scene More tests coming up

Bhavy☄️

77,003 次观看 • 2 天前

I tested Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 vs GPT 5.6 Sol vs Gemini 3.8 Flash I capped Fable, Kimi & Sol at $2 and asked them to generate this beach scene. Fable 5.1: Looks good at first glance, but made many mistakes, like people sitting on the volleyball court. Kimi K3: It did well. There were no major bugs like in Fable 5.1, and everything looks good. Sol: Bad at 3D scenes as usual, but Astra will definitely fix that. Gemini 3.8 Flash: I ran it in a loop for 35+ mins and it cost $0.95. It didn’t understand what it was fixing. The output here is the enhanced version. IMO, not even Terra level. Gemini's benchmarks say Opus 5-level, but maybe not for spatial understanding. Gemini has other use cases. Which one did the best job?

I tested Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 vs GPT 5.6 Sol vs Gemini 3.8 Flash I capped Fable, Kimi & Sol at $2 and asked them to generate this beach scene. Fable 5.1: Looks good at first glance, but made many mistakes, like people sitting on the volleyball court. Kimi K3: It did well. There were no major bugs like in Fable 5.1, and everything looks good. Sol: Bad at 3D scenes as usual, but Astra will definitely fix that. Gemini 3.8 Flash: I ran it in a loop for 35+ mins and it cost $0.95. It didn’t understand what it was fixing. The output here is the enhanced version. IMO, not even Terra level. Gemini's benchmarks say Opus 5-level, but maybe not for spatial understanding. Gemini has other use cases. Which one did the best job?

Bhavy☄️

31,868 次观看 • 21 小时前

Claude Fable 5.1 is really good at making neat little dioramas Heres one of a WW1 battlefield Prompt 👇

Claude Fable 5.1 is really good at making neat little dioramas Heres one of a WW1 battlefield Prompt 👇

wick

36,958 次观看 • 2 天前

Kimi K3 beating Fable and Sol on price and quality. Command Code's internal flappy bench results are in. Really impressed with the results. For Kimi K3 we set the gameplay to hard while Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol were set to easier. Cost breakdown: • Kimi K3: $0.024 •Fable 5: $0.42 •GPT-5.6 Sol: $0.15 Ranking based on DX & features: •Kimi K3: 8/10 •Fable 5: 7.5/10 • GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 GPT 5.6 Sol max can definitely go on longer and wins the game overall, but that's something different. Grok 4.5 beats GPT 5.6 Sol on that, lol.Mm-hmm.

Kimi K3 beating Fable and Sol on price and quality. Command Code's internal flappy bench results are in. Really impressed with the results. For Kimi K3 we set the gameplay to hard while Fable 5 and GPT-5.6 Sol were set to easier. Cost breakdown: • Kimi K3: $0.024 •Fable 5: $0.42 •GPT-5.6 Sol: $0.15 Ranking based on DX & features: •Kimi K3: 8/10 •Fable 5: 7.5/10 • GPT-5.6 Sol: 7/10 GPT 5.6 Sol max can definitely go on longer and wins the game overall, but that's something different. Grok 4.5 beats GPT 5.6 Sol on that, lol.Mm-hmm.

Ahmad Awais

255,237 次观看 • 1 个月前

Did GPT-5.6 Sol beat Fable 5 for frontend work? GPT-5.5 got roasted for its frontend. Had to test the new one. Same challenge: one prompt + one reference image → Three.js 3D globe dashboard. Verdict: Fable 5 still edges it out. But at half the cost, GPT-5.6 Sol is a serious option now.

Did GPT-5.6 Sol beat Fable 5 for frontend work? GPT-5.5 got roasted for its frontend. Had to test the new one. Same challenge: one prompt + one reference image → Three.js 3D globe dashboard. Verdict: Fable 5 still edges it out. But at half the cost, GPT-5.6 Sol is a serious option now.

Kai

21,502 次观看 • 1 个月前

this is f**king insane Fable 5 goes away in 24 hours from Claude Code and someone just figured out how to get fable 5 reasoning in GPT 5.6 Sol with one prompt you have less than 24 hours to set this up as this takes away 20% of your usage limit here is how: 1) Paste the prompt and ask it to "make an operating manual" 2) Go the Codex App > Settings > Personalisation > Custom Instructions 3) Use GPT 5.5 / GPT 5.6 and now you have Fable 5 reasoning at 1/3 th the price save and bookmark it no matter what

this is f**king insane Fable 5 goes away in 24 hours from Claude Code and someone just figured out how to get fable 5 reasoning in GPT 5.6 Sol with one prompt you have less than 24 hours to set this up as this takes away 20% of your usage limit here is how: 1) Paste the prompt and ask it to "make an operating manual" 2) Go the Codex App > Settings > Personalisation > Custom Instructions 3) Use GPT 5.5 / GPT 5.6 and now you have Fable 5 reasoning at 1/3 th the price save and bookmark it no matter what

Avid

57,544 次观看 • 1 个月前

The new Fable 5.1 built three games and did it 7% cheaper! We gave the same prompts through Atomic Agent: ✦ Sticky ball that rolls up everything in its path ✦ Capybara surfing down a river, Subway Surfers style ✦ Dumpling running an endless conveyor dodge Outputs: ✦ Claude Fable 5, via Atomic Agent: $7.65 ✦ Claude Fable 5.1, via Atomic Agent: $7.08 Run it through an agent and that cache discount is where the money hides. The loop reads the file, watches it break, and pulls the whole context back in to fix it, over and over. Every one of those re-reads costs a quarter on 5.1 of what it cost on 5. Same games on screen, and the newer version just spends less to get there. Across three builds the loop paid for the upgrade on its own.

The new Fable 5.1 built three games and did it 7% cheaper! We gave the same prompts through Atomic Agent: ✦ Sticky ball that rolls up everything in its path ✦ Capybara surfing down a river, Subway Surfers style ✦ Dumpling running an endless conveyor dodge Outputs: ✦ Claude Fable 5, via Atomic Agent: $7.65 ✦ Claude Fable 5.1, via Atomic Agent: $7.08 Run it through an agent and that cache discount is where the money hides. The loop reads the file, watches it break, and pulls the whole context back in to fix it, over and over. Every one of those re-reads costs a quarter on 5.1 of what it cost on 5. Same games on screen, and the newer version just spends less to get there. Across three builds the loop paid for the upgrade on its own.

Atomic Agent

19,638 次观看 • 2 天前

GPT-5.6 vs GPT-5.5 on my custom spaceship prompt. I gave both models the exact same custom prompt. This is also the same prompt I previously gave to Fable 5. For context, GPT-5.6 Pro worked for 87 minutes, while GPT-5.5 Extra High worked for 34 minutes and 42 seconds. As I’ve said before, based on great authority GPT-5.6 will be an incremental/soldi improvement over GPT-5.5, not a “Fable killer.” My rough expectation has been that it would trade blows with Fable 5 on some benchmarks, maybe win around half depending on the category, but not clearly surpass it overall. And again fable five will have bigger model smell, but this was expected. After testing this coding output, that view feels pretty accurate. GPT-5.6 is clearly better than GPT-5.5 in several visual areas. The lighting, shading, chairs, object details, and exterior of the spaceship looked noticeably stronger. The scene was also easier to test. I do want to give GPT-5.5 credit though. It built out the rooms much much better and the planets looked better than GPT-5.6’s. It was also interesting that both GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 produced better-looking planets than Fable 5 in this specific test. The downside with GPT-5.5 was stability. The game was much glitchier and harder to test compared to GPT-5.6. But when it comes to the core of the demo, which is the spaceship itself, Fable 5 still beat both models pretty comfortably. GPT-5.6 is impressive, but from this test, it looks exactly like what I expected which was a meaningful incremental improvement over GPT-5.5, at least for indie game demos, but not something that replaces Fable 5. In collaboration with Chetaslua

GPT-5.6 vs GPT-5.5 on my custom spaceship prompt. I gave both models the exact same custom prompt. This is also the same prompt I previously gave to Fable 5. For context, GPT-5.6 Pro worked for 87 minutes, while GPT-5.5 Extra High worked for 34 minutes and 42 seconds. As I’ve said before, based on great authority GPT-5.6 will be an incremental/soldi improvement over GPT-5.5, not a “Fable killer.” My rough expectation has been that it would trade blows with Fable 5 on some benchmarks, maybe win around half depending on the category, but not clearly surpass it overall. And again fable five will have bigger model smell, but this was expected. After testing this coding output, that view feels pretty accurate. GPT-5.6 is clearly better than GPT-5.5 in several visual areas. The lighting, shading, chairs, object details, and exterior of the spaceship looked noticeably stronger. The scene was also easier to test. I do want to give GPT-5.5 credit though. It built out the rooms much much better and the planets looked better than GPT-5.6’s. It was also interesting that both GPT-5.5 and GPT-5.6 produced better-looking planets than Fable 5 in this specific test. The downside with GPT-5.5 was stability. The game was much glitchier and harder to test compared to GPT-5.6. But when it comes to the core of the demo, which is the spaceship itself, Fable 5 still beat both models pretty comfortably. GPT-5.6 is impressive, but from this test, it looks exactly like what I expected which was a meaningful incremental improvement over GPT-5.5, at least for indie game demos, but not something that replaces Fable 5. In collaboration with Chetaslua

Chris

250,919 次观看 • 2 个月前

Fable 5.1 is an absolute beast for game dev. I took my Opus 5 space game and told Fable to "just make it look better". It overhauled everything with a TON of detail, AND made it 2x faster 🤯 Code: Demo: Every pixel you see is made by AI. Fable modeled everything in Blender, generated textures with code, and in a few cases ran image models via CLI. In mere months we'll be vibe-coding AAA graphics at this rate. Just insane. Of course, Fable recorded and edited this comparison video too (with a little help from Opus at the end, because of the Fable outage)

Fable 5.1 is an absolute beast for game dev. I took my Opus 5 space game and told Fable to "just make it look better". It overhauled everything with a TON of detail, AND made it 2x faster 🤯 Code: Demo: Every pixel you see is made by AI. Fable modeled everything in Blender, generated textures with code, and in a few cases ran image models via CLI. In mere months we'll be vibe-coding AAA graphics at this rate. Just insane. Of course, Fable recorded and edited this comparison video too (with a little help from Opus at the end, because of the Fable outage)

Anshu

27,581 次观看 • 19 小时前

Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 Tested both models with the same prompt at the highest reasoning level available. > Fable took 18 minutes to complete this test and cost $12.60 > Kimi K3 took 10 minutes and cost around $6.95 Which one wins here?

Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 Tested both models with the same prompt at the highest reasoning level available. > Fable took 18 minutes to complete this test and cost $12.60 > Kimi K3 took 10 minutes and cost around $6.95 Which one wins here?

Bhavy☄️

144,974 次观看 • 2 天前