Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

Two frontier models. Two very different demos. (GPT-5.6 Sol and Claude Fable 5) GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra was pushed in a mathematical direction and generated a Minecraft-style clone in Lean. Yes, that Lean. Meanwhile, Claude Fable 5 took a game development route and built a Minecraft mod featuring a Dark... show more

FHILY👑

7,907 subscribers

19,336 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

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

127,195 Aufrufe • vor 25 Tagen

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

22,212 Aufrufe • vor 20 Tagen

KIMI K3 IS A NIGHTMARE FOR CLAUDE FABLE-5 AND GPT-5.6-SOL FOR GAME DEVELOPMENT Tried building a playable MMORPG with Kimi K3 featuring horse riding, rooftop parkour, combat and an explorable open world. The whole thing took about 55 minutes from a single prompt and cost exactly $9.37 to generate.

KIMI K3 IS A NIGHTMARE FOR CLAUDE FABLE-5 AND GPT-5.6-SOL FOR GAME DEVELOPMENT Tried building a playable MMORPG with Kimi K3 featuring horse riding, rooftop parkour, combat and an explorable open world. The whole thing took about 55 minutes from a single prompt and cost exactly $9.37 to generate.

aditya

97,379 Aufrufe • vor 17 Tagen

Kimi K3 just 3 shotted a whole walkable voxel town with drivable cars — Voxelville, around $3.24 in API usage. The same token cost would be $10.80 with Fable 5 and $6 with GPT 5.6 Sol. Fable 5 built its own Maplewood, GPT 5.6 Sol built Willowwick, but on price/quality Kimi K3 just cooked both of them. The era of free indie game development is closer than you think!

Kimi K3 just 3 shotted a whole walkable voxel town with drivable cars — Voxelville, around $3.24 in API usage. The same token cost would be $10.80 with Fable 5 and $6 with GPT 5.6 Sol. Fable 5 built its own Maplewood, GPT 5.6 Sol built Willowwick, but on price/quality Kimi K3 just cooked both of them. The era of free indie game development is closer than you think!

Kirill

63,180 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen

This is hands down the best clone of Minecraft I've ever seen This was built using multiple frontier coding models: Gemini 3 Pro, GPT 5.1 Codex, and Claude Opus 4.1. Switching between multiple models is such a superpower

This is hands down the best clone of Minecraft I've ever seen This was built using multiple frontier coding models: Gemini 3 Pro, GPT 5.1 Codex, and Claude Opus 4.1. Switching between multiple models is such a superpower

Aryan Vichare

93,980 Aufrufe • vor 8 Monaten

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

250,206 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

If you're a trader still not using AI you're f*ckd. We connected Claude Fable-5 and GPT Sol 5.6 to the entire stock market and gave it a virtual machine to go wild. Insane levels of alpha have been generated thus far. Heres how it works:

If you're a trader still not using AI you're f*ckd. We connected Claude Fable-5 and GPT Sol 5.6 to the entire stock market and gave it a virtual machine to go wild. Insane levels of alpha have been generated thus far. Heres how it works:

Xynth

488,640 Aufrufe • vor 17 Tagen

wow... GPT 5.6 Sol Passed the Replit Benchmark. In one prompt 5.6 on Codex created a full Replit clone with DB, Sandboxes, and an agent that builds and edits full web apps. Only Fable and GPT 5.6 have passed this benchmark. 5.6 is much better at designing iOS apps than 5.5 as well.

wow... GPT 5.6 Sol Passed the Replit Benchmark. In one prompt 5.6 on Codex created a full Replit clone with DB, Sandboxes, and an agent that builds and edits full web apps. Only Fable and GPT 5.6 have passed this benchmark. 5.6 is much better at designing iOS apps than 5.5 as well.

Riley Brown

123,242 Aufrufe • vor 26 Tagen

Claude fable 5 is operating in a completely different dimension 🤯 Compared it with Claude Opus 4.8, Gemini 3.1 Pro, and GPT 5.5, the visual gap is insane. From 3D fluid dynamics to volumetric animation and complex physics, Fable 5 crushes the game. It’s not even close.

Claude fable 5 is operating in a completely different dimension 🤯 Compared it with Claude Opus 4.8, Gemini 3.1 Pro, and GPT 5.5, the visual gap is insane. From 3D fluid dynamics to volumetric animation and complex physics, Fable 5 crushes the game. It’s not even close.

GMI Cloud

320,015 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

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 Aufrufe • vor 22 Tagen

Crazy. Opus 5 outperformed Fable 5 on 3d modeling at 2/3 the price We tested Opus 5, Fable 5, and GPT 5.6 Sol on the same prompt: build an explorable Japanese suburban street in Three.js, full 3D, rendered like a hand-drawn anime background. All on Max effort. Opus 5 took the longest but delivered the most varied scenery: clean dark outlines, flat cel-shaded color bands, dense street details down to the vending machine signage. Fable paid more attention to details, and while GPT 5.6 Sol was 3-4x cheaper and the fastest, but the render shows it: sparse, washed out, barely styled. Opus 5: 1hr 21min · $26.7 Fable 5: 1hr 5min · $35 GPT 5.6 Sol: 41min · $7.1

Crazy. Opus 5 outperformed Fable 5 on 3d modeling at 2/3 the price We tested Opus 5, Fable 5, and GPT 5.6 Sol on the same prompt: build an explorable Japanese suburban street in Three.js, full 3D, rendered like a hand-drawn anime background. All on Max effort. Opus 5 took the longest but delivered the most varied scenery: clean dark outlines, flat cel-shaded color bands, dense street details down to the vending machine signage. Fable paid more attention to details, and while GPT 5.6 Sol was 3-4x cheaper and the fastest, but the render shows it: sparse, washed out, barely styled. Opus 5: 1hr 21min · $26.7 Fable 5: 1hr 5min · $35 GPT 5.6 Sol: 41min · $7.1

GMI Cloud

53,240 Aufrufe • vor 10 Tagen

Introducing autoresearch with GPT 5.6 We had GPT 5.6 Sol reproduce the key findings from “Towards Mechanistically Understanding Why Memorized Knowledge Fails to Generalize in LLM Finetuning” Compared to GPT-5.5 and even Fable 5, GPT-5.6 stayed more focused on a few, critical experiments and spent less time on peripheral details. It also asked fewer “clarification” questions and independently resolved ambiguities instead of pushing them back to us OpenAI pushing the boundaries of the automated research loop with models that don’t have handcuffs

Introducing autoresearch with GPT 5.6 We had GPT 5.6 Sol reproduce the key findings from “Towards Mechanistically Understanding Why Memorized Knowledge Fails to Generalize in LLM Finetuning” Compared to GPT-5.5 and even Fable 5, GPT-5.6 stayed more focused on a few, critical experiments and spent less time on peripheral details. It also asked fewer “clarification” questions and independently resolved ambiguities instead of pushing them back to us OpenAI pushing the boundaries of the automated research loop with models that don’t have handcuffs

alphaXiv

85,197 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra lost to GPT-5.5 on physics at 3× the cost! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: - A monster truck backflipping onto a parked car - A stunt car jumping six buses into a brick wall - A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water Outputs: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra: 32.9K tokens, $0.33 Opus 4.8: 9.2K tokens, $0.24 GPT-5.5: 12.4K tokens, $0.11 Grok 4.5: 7.0K tokens, $0.08 Sol Ultra draws just like GPT-5.5, only with more detail and it shows clearest on the bus jump where the two look almost identical. In the other tests Sol Ultra came out worse than its predecessor and the physics really got weaker. We think GPT-5.5 took the truck flip and the train outright. With Sol Ultra you basically get GPT-5.5 with weaker physics and a nicer picture for 3x the price. Newborn Grok 4.5 failed two of the three tests and only came good on the train

GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra lost to GPT-5.5 on physics at 3× the cost! We gave 4 models the same prompt: build three self-contained HTML5 canvas scenes with real physics demos Prompts: - A monster truck backflipping onto a parked car - A stunt car jumping six buses into a brick wall - A train derailing off a broken bridge into the water Outputs: GPT-5.6 Sol Ultra: 32.9K tokens, $0.33 Opus 4.8: 9.2K tokens, $0.24 GPT-5.5: 12.4K tokens, $0.11 Grok 4.5: 7.0K tokens, $0.08 Sol Ultra draws just like GPT-5.5, only with more detail and it shows clearest on the bus jump where the two look almost identical. In the other tests Sol Ultra came out worse than its predecessor and the physics really got weaker. We think GPT-5.5 took the truck flip and the train outright. With Sol Ultra you basically get GPT-5.5 with weaker physics and a nicer picture for 3x the price. Newborn Grok 4.5 failed two of the three tests and only came good on the train

atomic.chat

896,867 Aufrufe • vor 25 Tagen

I was wrong about Kimi K3 Just tried it in Claude Code and it is Fable 5 level for sure Far better than GPT-5.6 Sol at least at front-end It is really slow and consumes a lot of tokens but it is so good at completing its task, I like what I see here Kimi.ai

I was wrong about Kimi K3 Just tried it in Claude Code and it is Fable 5 level for sure Far better than GPT-5.6 Sol at least at front-end It is really slow and consumes a lot of tokens but it is so good at completing its task, I like what I see here Kimi.ai

Hamza

258,366 Aufrufe • vor 18 Tagen

Here's GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable asked to build the exact same app (prompts in the article!) What do you think? I have my opinions, but I'd like to hear yours. Both built complete, working apps, but with very different approaches: - Sol took less than half the time at the same (high) reasoning - Sol spent much less time on frame analysis. Fable dumped sheets of frames for every transition and scrutinized them multiple times; Sol only checked twice, and both times was just like "looks great, continuing" - At first, Sol intentionally ignored my request to use image generation! It went with procedurally generated food images "for simplicity" (they looked terrible) - On the second prompt, Sol generated images, but intentionally ignored my suggestion for transparent image backgrounds, saying full photos "preserve shadows more convincingly" - Sol's used its built-in GPT Image 2 integration, which saved cost; Fable had to use the Gemini API - Sol didn't seem to know how to use Liquid Glass at all - Fable was more restrained; Sol wanted to add extra labels and detail - On the other hand, Fable decided to add an extra detail page for foods, while Sol did not - Both had nice haptics on device - Fable added a pinch dismiss gesture; Sol did not do gestures

Here's GPT-5.6 Sol vs Fable asked to build the exact same app (prompts in the article!) What do you think? I have my opinions, but I'd like to hear yours. Both built complete, working apps, but with very different approaches: - Sol took less than half the time at the same (high) reasoning - Sol spent much less time on frame analysis. Fable dumped sheets of frames for every transition and scrutinized them multiple times; Sol only checked twice, and both times was just like "looks great, continuing" - At first, Sol intentionally ignored my request to use image generation! It went with procedurally generated food images "for simplicity" (they looked terrible) - On the second prompt, Sol generated images, but intentionally ignored my suggestion for transparent image backgrounds, saying full photos "preserve shadows more convincingly" - Sol's used its built-in GPT Image 2 integration, which saved cost; Fable had to use the Gemini API - Sol didn't seem to know how to use Liquid Glass at all - Fable was more restrained; Sol wanted to add extra labels and detail - On the other hand, Fable decided to add an extra detail page for foods, while Sol did not - Both had nice haptics on device - Fable added a pinch dismiss gesture; Sol did not do gestures

Anshu

160,668 Aufrufe • vor 21 Tagen

this is what 24 hours of Fable 5 can do context: - World of Warcraft inspired 2D game - faithful recreation of the game mechanics - questing, leveling, loot, bags, rare/elite mobs, etc this is all working incredibly well already i'm now traveling for the next week but will keep this running and bring GPT 5.6 Sol into the mix to speed up progress and avoid hitting Claude limits Codex generated the pixel art already btw. music/sfx will obviously be replaced, this is just a PoC

this is what 24 hours of Fable 5 can do context: - World of Warcraft inspired 2D game - faithful recreation of the game mechanics - questing, leveling, loot, bags, rare/elite mobs, etc this is all working incredibly well already i'm now traveling for the next week but will keep this running and bring GPT 5.6 Sol into the mix to speed up progress and avoid hitting Claude limits Codex generated the pixel art already btw. music/sfx will obviously be replaced, this is just a PoC

Robin Ebers

35,831 Aufrufe • vor 18 Tagen

Models like GPT 5.6 or Fable 5 are accelerating the commodification of software. For instance, I gave Fable a screenshot of the Stripe, OpenAI, and Anthropic websites with a simple prompt: “Create a pixel-perfect reproduction of this website.” It took only seconds and a simple prompt to duplicate the design. This is exciting because there are so many poorly designed websites, but now they are just a prompt away from achieving world-class design!!

Models like GPT 5.6 or Fable 5 are accelerating the commodification of software. For instance, I gave Fable a screenshot of the Stripe, OpenAI, and Anthropic websites with a simple prompt: “Create a pixel-perfect reproduction of this website.” It took only seconds and a simple prompt to duplicate the design. This is exciting because there are so many poorly designed websites, but now they are just a prompt away from achieving world-class design!!

Nicolas Bustamante

37,754 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Someone asked Claude Fable 5 to build Minecraft. The results are honestly absurd. • A fully playable survival game with villages, raids, bosses, enchanting, and redstone • 200+ FPS on a fanless MacBook Air • Every sound and song is generated in real time (from oscillators)

Someone asked Claude Fable 5 to build Minecraft. The results are honestly absurd. • A fully playable survival game with villages, raids, bosses, enchanting, and redstone • 200+ FPS on a fanless MacBook Air • Every sound and song is generated in real time (from oscillators)

DevDork

106,364 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

Claude Fable 5, Claude Opus 5 and ChatGPT 5.6 Sol were asked to paint the Mona Lisa in a browser, and all three rebuilt Leonardo's actual 500 year old technique on their own. The entire prompt was one line: "Create a single HTML file that animates the painting of the Mona Lisa layer by layer, the way an old master would build it up". Nobody told them how oil painting works, they just knew.. > Charcoal study, umber ground, shadow and atmosphere, color glazing, sfumato, varnished finish -- the exact Renaissance layering order, and not one of those words was in the prompt. > GPT 5.6 Sol went furthest and named its own app Sfumato Studio, with a completion counter, playback speed and a restart button. The models are no longer copying the result -> they are copying the process. Save this one -- the prompt is right there, go repaint your own ↓

Claude Fable 5, Claude Opus 5 and ChatGPT 5.6 Sol were asked to paint the Mona Lisa in a browser, and all three rebuilt Leonardo's actual 500 year old technique on their own. The entire prompt was one line: "Create a single HTML file that animates the painting of the Mona Lisa layer by layer, the way an old master would build it up". Nobody told them how oil painting works, they just knew.. > Charcoal study, umber ground, shadow and atmosphere, color glazing, sfumato, varnished finish -- the exact Renaissance layering order, and not one of those words was in the prompt. > GPT 5.6 Sol went furthest and named its own app Sfumato Studio, with a completion counter, playback speed and a restart button. The models are no longer copying the result -> they are copying the process. Save this one -- the prompt is right there, go repaint your own ↓

slash1s

645,205 Aufrufe • vor 1 Tag

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 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat