My First Impressions of Fable 5.2
I’ve been using it for a few hours now, and I have a few thoughts on the new Fable 5.2:
1. The weirdest RL I've ever seen. On some tasks it's a genius; on others, it's as dumb as a shrimp. In pure coding tasks, it's at least on par with Opus 5.5. But ask it to reason through something non-standard that isn't coding-related, and its output drops to the level of GPT-3.5. I asked both Fable 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra to flesh out a project idea and Fable’s response was complete garbage
2. Fable models have always been notorious for mediocre taste - worse than Opus. This time, Fable surprised me with a complete absence of it. In a long list, it inexplicably added two separate pagination controls: one expands the currently loaded list of data, and the second one underneath fetches new content. On top of that, you can see plenty of demos on X with pretty mediocre results that are even worse than Opus
3. It seems to be the most token-hungry model in the world. The advertised price cut makes zero sense when Fable 5.2 burns through four times more tokens than 5.1
4. The most pedantic model yet. It constantly tries to prove you wrong. Tell it that snow is white, and it will find a million reasons why that's not entirely accurate. GPT-6 Astra had this annoying trait as well
5. It’s noticeably faster. On medium effort, it responds almost instantaneously
6. Fable 5.5 has picked up a trait that used to belong to Sonnet 5.5 - diligence. Once it takes on a task, it will check and iterate multiple times until it achieves a solid result
7. For coding tasks, there is zero difference compared to Opus 5.5. Across all other aspects, Opus 5.5 is, in my subjective view, superior to Fable 5.5
I’ve never really liked Fable models. There’s not much point to them. They’re stubborn, weighed down by guardrail filters, have poor taste, and are expensive, token-hungry, and in some areas worse than the Opus lineup. This one is no exception. In my view, the new Fable 5.2 makes no sense, and I think I understand why they called this release 5.2 rather than 5.5. A revolutionary leap like the jump from Opus 5 to 5.5 just didn't happen
Introducing Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Mythos 5.2, designed to tackle the most daunting technical challenges.
They’re capable collaborators on ambitious projects in many fields, and show improvements in areas like coding, reasoning, and vision.
the most import skill in 2026 is still being able to tell your agents "wtf is this crap, no, not like this"
if you stop doing that, you're basically fucked, despite what some devfluencers would like you to think.
> be AI company
> scrape the entire internet
> ignore licenses and copyright
> download millions of pirated books
> use them to train frontier models
> spend tens of millions buying physical books
> cut off their spines
> scan every page
> destroy the originals
> lecture everyone else about intellectual property
> we are the good guys
Today, we're launching @genproof: a research lab making formal methods accessible.
We found bugs in 100+ OSS projects, including 6 libraries “formally verified” by Anthropic. We’re also top-1 on the lean-eval leaderboard.
With our tools, you too can become a verifier: 🧵
The free tier of Paper is super restrictive. 100 MCP tool calls/week doesn't get your far.
https://t.co/AK4fYF52bR is an open source alternative, no limits on MCP tool calls. Unlimited designs. Let's create some hype!