Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Zur Startseite

GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable 5. I put both through my hardest frontend test: a 3D globe dashboard. Same prompt. Same reference image. Sol on the left. Fable on the right. GPT-5.6 Sol is a major leap from 5.5. Fable 5 still wins on spacing, balance, and first-pass polish. For...

199,798 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

43 Kommentare

Profilbild von Prathmesh
Prathmeshvor 3 Monaten

5.6 sol performed much better according to the fable. Because the eart is been shown very shinny in fable.

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

Yeah, GPT models have been weak at frontend for a while. Looks like this is finally fixed.

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

I'll share the prompt, reference image, and full code in a follow-up. Follow if you want the full breakdown.

Profilbild von Lokesh Singh
Lokesh Singhvor 3 Monaten

GPT looks insane More natural...Fable is too polished

Profilbild von Noah
Noahvor 3 Monaten

Interesting comparison. As someone building SaaS with AI coding agents, I wonder less about “who wins the demo” and more about: Which model helps us build software that survives production? That’s the real test.

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

@guanghui_hao That is true. That is why I picked a real case with a bit of difficulty.

Profilbild von Noah
Noahvor 3 Monaten

I agree. Benchmarks show capability. Production projects reveal reliability.

Profilbild von Daxesh
Daxeshvor 3 Monaten

the color gradient are too high on fable one which gives it a AI look while the GPt one is soft and smooth

Profilbild von Watoryuk
Watoryukvor 3 Monaten

Tf u mean sol looks miles better

Profilbild von Luckey Faraday
Luckey Faradayvor 3 Monaten

I had Fable 5 collaborate with Terra Ultra to make this galaxy exploration experience. I've been exploring for hours.

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

cool 👍

Profilbild von Harith Bakhrani
Harith Bakhranivor 3 Monaten

imho, 5.6 performed better in this case fable overused its skills

Profilbild von David T Kramaley
David T Kramaleyvor 3 Monaten

sol cuts price in half while closing the UI gap, fable still edges polish

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

Honestly, if Sol does not disappoint, that is already good enough.

Profilbild von Tim B.
Tim B.vor 3 Monaten

5.6 wins

Profilbild von Dear AI 🥔
Dear AI 🥔vor 3 Monaten

sol closing the gap at half the price is the inflection point everyone was waiting for

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

GPT-5.6 feels much more accessible now.

Profilbild von Eduardo Bergel
Eduardo Bergelvor 3 Monaten

🫡 Fable is Amazingly good. But OMG!, GPT-5.6 is on par or better. It has two advantages. The OpenAI environment is better. And The Model thinks harder, longer, before completing the same task. And output is indeed extraordinary. What a time to be alive! We have these two models today, At this point, for the very first time, I cannot even imagine what we will have in 5 years.

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

I still prefer GPT-5.6 overall. The price makes it a much easier choice for me.

Profilbild von Sogni.ai
Sogni.aivor 3 Monaten

no matter whether it's GPT-5.6 or Fable 5, with the Sogni Creative Agent it's always a total game changer 🔥

Profilbild von Raul Kieselbach
Raul Kieselbachvor 3 Monaten

❤️ GPT-5.6 vs Fable 5 testing both

Profilbild von Zerxy
Zerxyvor 3 Monaten

Lol its at the point where it really comes down to your preference not which one is actually better

Profilbild von yan ianthe
yan ianthevor 3 Monaten

Same experience here—GPT 5.5 looked painfully weak on this exact kind of frontend task.😅

Profilbild von happyOne
happyOnevor 3 Monaten

What are the prompts? Can you share it?

Profilbild von Aenish Shrestha
Aenish Shresthavor 3 Monaten

Interesting but i have heard sol not so great as fable

Profilbild von Fran Nogueira
Fran Nogueiravor 3 Monaten

Great!

Profilbild von Quadcode AI
Quadcode AIvor 3 Monaten

sol catching up this fast is a huge win for everyone. if we get near-fable quality at half the price it basically means we can run twice as many experiments without breaking the bank. love seeing the gap close like this

Profilbild von spadafordi
spadafordivor 3 Monaten

Yeah I've been testing lots of side-by-side, and still not going to push design work from Gemini to Sol. It's better, but not there.

Profilbild von Tim B.
Tim B.vor 3 Monaten

5.6 is much more natural and better

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

Overall, the gap is pretty small.

Profilbild von Matteo
Matteovor 3 Monaten

@josemvcerqueira

Profilbild von 0zkBrewer
0zkBrewervor 3 Monaten

very good result from Sol.

Profilbild von Prompt & Profit AI
Prompt & Profit AIvor 3 Monaten

This is actually a fascinating comparison. The fact that GPT-5.6 can get this close while costing significantly less shows how fast AI development is moving. The competition is only going to make these tools better

Profilbild von Kai
Kaivor 3 Monaten

For value for money, GPT-5.6 is easily my #1 right now.

Profilbild von Mehmet Türkis
Mehmet Türkisvor 3 Monaten

Sol kick the fable

Profilbild von bgblur - AI Video Privacy
bgblur - AI Video Privacyvor 3 Monaten

Which one handled responsiveness better?

Profilbild von Bally_AgenticAI
Bally_AgenticAIvor 3 Monaten

Single-prompt tests show first-pass polish, but the real gap is recovery - what happens when the model critiques and fixes its own output mid-run. That loop matters more than the initial render. Built something similar -

Profilbild von Saman Ahmed
Saman Ahmedvor 3 Monaten

I've noticed the first-pass quality gap is shrinking fast. My take: cost becomes a much bigger factor once the results get close.

Profilbild von oliver
olivervor 3 Monaten

Also ich bin hier ganz klar auf der Seite von ChatGPT. Sie bieten viel mehr Nutzen und Claude Code ist nicht so viel besser.

Profilbild von Mihnea
Mihneavor 3 Monaten

care to share the prompt?

Profilbild von Nick Cheung
Nick Cheungvor 3 Monaten

@0xausten

Profilbild von unchosen.eth
unchosen.ethvor 3 Monaten

sol improving from 5.5 is a big step

Profilbild von Muhammad Ali
Muhammad Alivor 3 Monaten

Sol closing the gap on frontend at half the cost is the stat that actually drives switching decisions. Most teams don't need the absolute best first-pass polish, they need something good enough that ships fast and leaves budget for the next three features.

Ähnliche Videos

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 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten