Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Fable 5.1 vs GPT 5.6 Sol tested both models with same prompt at highest reasoning available > Fable took 10 minutes to complete this test and costed $1.6 > Sol took 7 minutes and costed around $.95 even tho sol is cheaper and faster but results are really different...

notjazii's profile picture

J A Z I I

8,632 subscribers

40,331 просмотров • 3 дней назад •via X (Twitter)

Наука и технологии
LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

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?
0:20

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☄️

145,921 просмотров • 3 дней назад

this is f**king dangerous someone ran GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Fable 5 side by side. same prompt. same task. one shot each. both nailed it first try. Sol just finished faster. nobody expected that. Fable 5 was supposed to dominate long reasoning without competition. you have less than 24 hours to set this up as this takes away 20% of your usage limit save and bookmark it no matter what
0:15

this is f**king dangerous someone ran GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Fable 5 side by side. same prompt. same task. one shot each. both nailed it first try. Sol just finished faster. nobody expected that. Fable 5 was supposed to dominate long reasoning without competition. you have less than 24 hours to set this up as this takes away 20% of your usage limit save and bookmark it no matter what

Khairallah AL-Awady

687,168 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna tested both models with the same prompt on highest reasoning > luna one shotted everything in under 3 mins in devin > v4 Flash needed an extra prompt to fix the movement and took over 5 mins in aihubmix cli which one do you think won?
0:17

DeepSeek V4 Flash vs GPT-5.6 Luna tested both models with the same prompt on highest reasoning > luna one shotted everything in under 3 mins in devin > v4 Flash needed an extra prompt to fix the movement and took over 5 mins in aihubmix cli which one do you think won?

J A Z I I

47,629 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

I gave the same prompt to Kimi K3 Max and GPT 5.6 SOL Ultra to create a 3D castle GPT 5.6 SOL Ultra is clearly better here, but I am also really impressed with the Kimi K3 as well Anthropic gotta reset the limits again lol
0:15

I gave the same prompt to Kimi K3 Max and GPT 5.6 SOL Ultra to create a 3D castle GPT 5.6 SOL Ultra is clearly better here, but I am also really impressed with the Kimi K3 as well Anthropic gotta reset the limits again lol

fardeen

35,594 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

HOLY SHIT Omen Alpha finished the full test in just 1h 30m, while GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT 5.6 Luna Max took around 3 hours. Bro, what even is this model?? Are we actually looking at something that could compete with GPT-6 Astra or Fable 5.1?
0:12

HOLY SHIT Omen Alpha finished the full test in just 1h 30m, while GLM 5.3 Flash and GPT 5.6 Luna Max took around 3 hours. Bro, what even is this model?? Are we actually looking at something that could compete with GPT-6 Astra or Fable 5.1?

Iam_

37,312 просмотров • 1 день назад

Claude Fable 5 and Opus 5 are #1 when it comes to UI. GPT 5.6 Sol and Grok 4.6 don't come anywhere close to the design capabilities that Claude models have. Even though Fable 5 and Opus 5 are slow and expensive I keep finding myself reaching for them for design. This hero section was made with Fable 5 and Opus 5.
0:10

Claude Fable 5 and Opus 5 are #1 when it comes to UI. GPT 5.6 Sol and Grok 4.6 don't come anywhere close to the design capabilities that Claude models have. Even though Fable 5 and Opus 5 are slow and expensive I keep finding myself reaching for them for design. This hero section was made with Fable 5 and Opus 5.

BridgeMind

58,702 просмотров • 15 дней назад

You can now orchestrate Fable 5, Sol, and any model inside Codex with one plugin. It's called Codex-Orchestration. Assign Fable 5 as the advisor, Sol as the executor, or any model to any role. Then define the order they work in. Codex handles the routing. I ran Fable 5 High as planner with GPT-5.6 Sol Extra High as executor on a set of issues Opus and GPT-5.5 always struggled with. Done in 30 minutes. 40% fewer limit hits. 2x faster implementation. Install it by pasting this into Codex: "Install Codex Orchestration: codex plugin marketplace add Cjbuilds/Codex-Orchestration codex plugin add codex-orchestration@codex-orchestration Verify the installation, then tell me to start a new task." Then assign your models: @ codex-orchestration advisor: Claude Fable 5 High, Executor: GPT-5.6 Sol High Open source. Tweak the routing however you want.
0:14

You can now orchestrate Fable 5, Sol, and any model inside Codex with one plugin. It's called Codex-Orchestration. Assign Fable 5 as the advisor, Sol as the executor, or any model to any role. Then define the order they work in. Codex handles the routing. I ran Fable 5 High as planner with GPT-5.6 Sol Extra High as executor on a set of issues Opus and GPT-5.5 always struggled with. Done in 30 minutes. 40% fewer limit hits. 2x faster implementation. Install it by pasting this into Codex: "Install Codex Orchestration: codex plugin marketplace add Cjbuilds/Codex-Orchestration codex plugin add codex-orchestration@codex-orchestration Verify the installation, then tell me to start a new task." Then assign your models: @ codex-orchestration advisor: Claude Fable 5 High, Executor: GPT-5.6 Sol High Open source. Tweak the routing however you want.

Alvaro Cintas

91,269 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

GPT 5.6 Luna Max vs 5.6 Sol Medium… Yeah, it’s not even a question 😭 Sol on MEDIUM produced a much better result than Luna on MAX—and needed only around HALF the time. Same harness. Better generation. Faster result. Luna may be cheaper, but if you have the budget, I would absolutely use Sol. Saving money is not worth it when the weaker output creates hours of extra work later.
0:16

GPT 5.6 Luna Max vs 5.6 Sol Medium… Yeah, it’s not even a question 😭 Sol on MEDIUM produced a much better result than Luna on MAX—and needed only around HALF the time. Same harness. Better generation. Faster result. Luna may be cheaper, but if you have the budget, I would absolutely use Sol. Saving money is not worth it when the weaker output creates hours of extra work later.

OmedTheVibeCoder

98,811 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Kimi K3 beats GPT 5.6 Sol on both speed and in cost in backend bug fixing ! Planted 4 defects in the same Python order service: a wrong-total calculation, a broken access-control check (IDOR), a crash on invalid input, and an inventory oversell. Both models got identical code and the same prompt, with an automated test suite verifying every fix over the live API. Both went 4/4, but by the time Kimi K3 finished all 4, GPT 5.6 had only fixed 2. Kimi wrapped in under half the time, at half the cost. Kimi K3: 1min 34s · $0.1 · 4/4 GPT 5.6 Sol: 4min 6s · $0.2 · 4/4
0:13

Kimi K3 beats GPT 5.6 Sol on both speed and in cost in backend bug fixing ! Planted 4 defects in the same Python order service: a wrong-total calculation, a broken access-control check (IDOR), a crash on invalid input, and an inventory oversell. Both models got identical code and the same prompt, with an automated test suite verifying every fix over the live API. Both went 4/4, but by the time Kimi K3 finished all 4, GPT 5.6 had only fixed 2. Kimi wrapped in under half the time, at half the cost. Kimi K3: 1min 34s · $0.1 · 4/4 GPT 5.6 Sol: 4min 6s · $0.2 · 4/4

GMI Cloud

24,671 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

I tested Qwen 3.8 Max vs Kimi K3 Same scene, lighting, props, detail requirements. Qwen's output is decent, but it's not close to Kimi K3. Qwen's output came out messy, text handling was off, and the composition felt unorganized next to Kimi's version. In my opinion, Qwen isn't second to Fable 5 either, and it's also below GPT-5.6 Sol. It's a solid model, but not at that tier. Kimi K3 is still clearly ahead here.
0:13

I tested Qwen 3.8 Max vs Kimi K3 Same scene, lighting, props, detail requirements. Qwen's output is decent, but it's not close to Kimi K3. Qwen's output came out messy, text handling was off, and the composition felt unorganized next to Kimi's version. In my opinion, Qwen isn't second to Fable 5 either, and it's also below GPT-5.6 Sol. It's a solid model, but not at that tier. Kimi K3 is still clearly ahead here.

Bhavy☄️

34,045 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

It's never been a better time to be creative. (ever) The two best frontier models (ever) have been released within 30 days of each other. Here’s what we learned from running 4 frontier models head to head. >Sol has taste and Fable takes direction. 10 identical landing page briefs, judged blind by working creatives. GPT 5.6 Sol won 82% on loose briefs. But when handed a real design spec it finished last. 🧵
0:16

It's never been a better time to be creative. (ever) The two best frontier models (ever) have been released within 30 days of each other. Here’s what we learned from running 4 frontier models head to head. >Sol has taste and Fable takes direction. 10 identical landing page briefs, judged blind by working creatives. GPT 5.6 Sol won 82% on loose briefs. But when handed a real design spec it finished last. 🧵

ben

35,609 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

I tested Kimi K3 vs Claude Opus 4.8 Same prompt, an armory bay with lighting, props, and detail. Top is Kimi K3, bottom is Opus 4.8. It's not even close. Kimi K3 built a full scene with textures, proper lighting, ammo crates, weapon racks, working detail everywhere. Opus 4.8 gave me a near empty room with a couple of floating tables. No doubt it beats Opus 4.8. Kimi K3 is Fable 5 level, and it's clearly better than GPT-5.6 Sol at 3D and games. An open weight model just matched the best closed models on the market. Let that sink in.
0:13

I tested Kimi K3 vs Claude Opus 4.8 Same prompt, an armory bay with lighting, props, and detail. Top is Kimi K3, bottom is Opus 4.8. It's not even close. Kimi K3 built a full scene with textures, proper lighting, ammo crates, weapon racks, working detail everywhere. Opus 4.8 gave me a near empty room with a couple of floating tables. No doubt it beats Opus 4.8. Kimi K3 is Fable 5 level, and it's clearly better than GPT-5.6 Sol at 3D and games. An open weight model just matched the best closed models on the market. Let that sink in.

Bhavy☄️

476,936 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🚨 Qwen new checkpoint - kieran As usual it claims he is claude and made by anthropic but with tokenizer prompt , its clear - QWEN model Ignore website this is my test to know which model is which behind the scene , should i test it and compare with kimi k3 / opus 5 /sol 5.6
0:16

🚨 Qwen new checkpoint - kieran As usual it claims he is claude and made by anthropic but with tokenizer prompt , its clear - QWEN model Ignore website this is my test to know which model is which behind the scene , should i test it and compare with kimi k3 / opus 5 /sol 5.6

Chetaslua

15,544 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

🤯KIMI K3 ABSOLUTELY MOGS! BEATING Opus 4.8, GPT 5.5, and even Fable 5 in multiple benchmarks. They scored 1688 on GDPval-AA v2 🔥 This is a completely different breed of open-source models Kimi creates better games and front-end designs than Fable 5, but it's 8x cheaper! The results coming out are truly impressive! I will be testing this out further and posting multiple tests today. Stay tuned!
0:24

🤯KIMI K3 ABSOLUTELY MOGS! BEATING Opus 4.8, GPT 5.5, and even Fable 5 in multiple benchmarks. They scored 1688 on GDPval-AA v2 🔥 This is a completely different breed of open-source models Kimi creates better games and front-end designs than Fable 5, but it's 8x cheaper! The results coming out are truly impressive! I will be testing this out further and posting multiple tests today. Stay tuned!

Mark Santos

128,094 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

holy sh*t. this is f**king insane. muse spark 1.3 beats fable 5 and gpt 5.6 at 1/20th price i cancelled my $200/mo Claude subscription for this. i replaced fable 5 with muse spark 1.3 for only $10/mo on opencode go [it takes 3 minutes to set up:] 1/ install the model-router repo 2/ toggle opencode free to green 3/ that’s it.
0:13

holy sh*t. this is f**king insane. muse spark 1.3 beats fable 5 and gpt 5.6 at 1/20th price i cancelled my $200/mo Claude subscription for this. i replaced fable 5 with muse spark 1.3 for only $10/mo on opencode go [it takes 3 minutes to set up:] 1/ install the model-router repo 2/ toggle opencode free to green 3/ that’s it.

Avid

63,410 просмотров • 1 день назад

The gap between “here’s the design” and “here’s the working app” is getting very small. Grok 4.6 took #1 on the VISTA leaderboard, beating Claude Fable 5, Opus 5, and GPT-5.6 Sol. It has to look at a real Figma design, figure out the structure, recreate the visuals, and build the functioning app from it. And it finished the benchmark at roughly $2.38 per task. That’s the kind of shortcut builders actually care about. Grok SpaceXAI / Writer: Annette, Grok Imagine Designer: Janné
0:15

The gap between “here’s the design” and “here’s the working app” is getting very small. Grok 4.6 took #1 on the VISTA leaderboard, beating Claude Fable 5, Opus 5, and GPT-5.6 Sol. It has to look at a real Figma design, figure out the structure, recreate the visuals, and build the functioning app from it. And it finished the benchmark at roughly $2.38 per task. That’s the kind of shortcut builders actually care about. Grok SpaceXAI / Writer: Annette, Grok Imagine Designer: Janné

Mario Nawfal

58,791 просмотров • 18 дней назад

Holy moly: GLM-5.3 got much better in cybersecurity since our pre-release evaluation with Z.ai. It now matches GPT-5.6-Sol on our cybersecurity benchmark at 0.4x the cost 🤯 - At pass@1: it went from 60.4% to 65.6% CVEs rediscovered, crushing every other open model on one-shot tasks - At pass@3: it did 75% -> 78.1%, matching GPT-5.6-Sol - Its precision remained stable, reporting fewer false positives than DeepSeek models The performance increase comes from a behavioral change: the new version is more persistent. It tends to run longer, and had a ~43% reasoning tokens increase. But the performance upgrade is worth that additional cost. 1/3 🧵
0:12

Holy moly: GLM-5.3 got much better in cybersecurity since our pre-release evaluation with Z.ai. It now matches GPT-5.6-Sol on our cybersecurity benchmark at 0.4x the cost 🤯 - At pass@1: it went from 60.4% to 65.6% CVEs rediscovered, crushing every other open model on one-shot tasks - At pass@3: it did 75% -> 78.1%, matching GPT-5.6-Sol - Its precision remained stable, reporting fewer false positives than DeepSeek models The performance increase comes from a behavioral change: the new version is more persistent. It tends to run longer, and had a ~43% reasoning tokens increase. But the performance upgrade is worth that additional cost. 1/3 🧵

pilvar (Philippe Dourassov)

29,276 просмотров • 15 дней назад

Codex cooked for 12 hours 19 minutes last night using a /goal 🎉 It added: - Stopwatch (count up) - Clock (with seconds) - Pomodoro - Tabata - Autocomplete Everything worked except the UI interactions around auto-complete (Codex GPT-5.5 is still not great at UI, but even Claude Opus 4.8 Ultracode struggled here). Overall, I'm really happy with the results. These are features that I've wanted for a while, and getting them close to release is awesome.
0:17

Codex cooked for 12 hours 19 minutes last night using a /goal 🎉 It added: - Stopwatch (count up) - Clock (with seconds) - Pomodoro - Tabata - Autocomplete Everything worked except the UI interactions around auto-complete (Codex GPT-5.5 is still not great at UI, but even Claude Opus 4.8 Ultracode struggled here). Overall, I'm really happy with the results. These are features that I've wanted for a while, and getting them close to release is awesome.

Paul Solt

48,887 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

Comeback Journal Had to borrow SOL and got rekt all the way down to 0.7 SOL. Took a 0.5 SOL trade and scalped +0.2 SOL. Saturday, Aug. 2 – 12:59 AM Portfolio: 0.9 SOL By the end of Aug. 2... Back to 0 SOL. Aug. 3 0xW sent me 0.6 SOL because he made money from the NA shill. Thank you again. Started only risking 0.05–0.1 SOL per trade to protect capital. Built it back to 0.4 SOL. Then p sent me 1 SOL for the same reason. That genuinely helped me during survival mode. Portfolio: 1.4 SOL. Saw LMEOW at 40k. Put 0.5 SOL in, leaving me with 0.9 SOL on the sidelines. Yeah, I oversized, but I had that feeling. What made me buy wasn't the chart. The narrative made me extremely bullish. Volume kept increasing, and I kept seeing more smart wallets buying than selling. Sold 1.5 SOL around 255k. Then the timeline started pushing the "OG" coin again. Momentum died. Round-tripped a few SOL and finally sold my remaining 0.7 SOL around 114k. Turned that 0.5 SOL trade into roughly 2.2 SOL before closing the position. I still think splitting the attention between two coins as a marketing stunt hurts everyone involved. Btw LJC, a lot of traders look up to you. Encouraging more PvP because the "OG" needs marketing instead of letting the market naturally bag work only makes the trenches worse. If it wasn't for that in the back of my mind i could've been at 10 solana today, thanks. Aug. 3 – 12:04 PM Current portfolio: 3.1 SOL.
0:16

Comeback Journal Had to borrow SOL and got rekt all the way down to 0.7 SOL. Took a 0.5 SOL trade and scalped +0.2 SOL. Saturday, Aug. 2 – 12:59 AM Portfolio: 0.9 SOL By the end of Aug. 2... Back to 0 SOL. Aug. 3 0xW sent me 0.6 SOL because he made money from the NA shill. Thank you again. Started only risking 0.05–0.1 SOL per trade to protect capital. Built it back to 0.4 SOL. Then p sent me 1 SOL for the same reason. That genuinely helped me during survival mode. Portfolio: 1.4 SOL. Saw LMEOW at 40k. Put 0.5 SOL in, leaving me with 0.9 SOL on the sidelines. Yeah, I oversized, but I had that feeling. What made me buy wasn't the chart. The narrative made me extremely bullish. Volume kept increasing, and I kept seeing more smart wallets buying than selling. Sold 1.5 SOL around 255k. Then the timeline started pushing the "OG" coin again. Momentum died. Round-tripped a few SOL and finally sold my remaining 0.7 SOL around 114k. Turned that 0.5 SOL trade into roughly 2.2 SOL before closing the position. I still think splitting the attention between two coins as a marketing stunt hurts everyone involved. Btw LJC, a lot of traders look up to you. Encouraging more PvP because the "OG" needs marketing instead of letting the market naturally bag work only makes the trenches worse. If it wasn't for that in the back of my mind i could've been at 10 solana today, thanks. Aug. 3 – 12:04 PM Current portfolio: 3.1 SOL.

Nofelines 🐂🀄️

61,484 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

Flappy Bird w/ DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.2 vs Fable 5 I ran a small experiment: same game, same prompt, three different models. Test setup was simple: /𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚗 in Command Code. The thing I cared about was not UI. UI is now relatively easy for models to imitate. I cared more about UX: whether the model understands the interaction, the flow, the hierarchy, the little product decisions that make something feel usable. 𝙲𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚜: 𝙳𝚎𝚎𝚙𝚂𝚎𝚎𝚔 𝚟𝟺 𝙿𝚛𝚘: $𝟶.𝟶𝟶𝟶𝟾 𝙶𝙻𝙼 𝟻.𝟸: $𝟶.𝟶𝟺𝟾 𝙵𝚊𝚋𝚕𝚎 𝟻: $𝟶.𝟺𝟸 The surprising result was that Fable 5 did not produce a meaningfully better UX. It was good, but not good enough to justify the pricing delta for this kind of design task. Open-source models are getting very interesting here. They are much cheaper, competitive on UI, and increasingly good enough on UX. The gap is closing fast.
0:19

Flappy Bird w/ DeepSeek V4 Pro vs GLM 5.2 vs Fable 5 I ran a small experiment: same game, same prompt, three different models. Test setup was simple: /𝚍𝚎𝚜𝚒𝚐𝚗 in Command Code. The thing I cared about was not UI. UI is now relatively easy for models to imitate. I cared more about UX: whether the model understands the interaction, the flow, the hierarchy, the little product decisions that make something feel usable. 𝙲𝚘𝚜𝚝𝚜: 𝙳𝚎𝚎𝚙𝚂𝚎𝚎𝚔 𝚟𝟺 𝙿𝚛𝚘: $𝟶.𝟶𝟶𝟶𝟾 𝙶𝙻𝙼 𝟻.𝟸: $𝟶.𝟶𝟺𝟾 𝙵𝚊𝚋𝚕𝚎 𝟻: $𝟶.𝟺𝟸 The surprising result was that Fable 5 did not produce a meaningfully better UX. It was good, but not good enough to justify the pricing delta for this kind of design task. Open-source models are getting very interesting here. They are much cheaper, competitive on UI, and increasingly good enough on UX. The gap is closing fast.

Ahmad Awais

26,918 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад