Video wird geladen...
Video konnte nicht geladen werden
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... show more
199,798 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)
43 Kommentare

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

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

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

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

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.

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

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

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

Tf u mean sol looks miles better

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

cool 👍

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

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

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

5.6 wins

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

GPT-5.6 feels much more accessible now.

🫡 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.

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

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

❤️ GPT-5.6 vs Fable 5 testing both

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

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

What are the prompts? Can you share it?

Interesting but i have heard sol not so great as fable

Great!

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

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.

5.6 is much more natural and better

Overall, the gap is pretty small.

@josemvcerqueira

very good result from Sol.

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

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

Sol kick the fable

Which one handled responsiveness better?

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 -

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

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

care to share the prompt?

@0xausten

sol improving from 5.5 is a big step

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.
