Anthropic's Claude model for demanding reasoning and long-horizon agentic work, released as the successor to Fable 5. Same $10 / $50 rate with cache reads at a quarter of the cost; Anthropic points most workloads to the cheaper Opus 5.5.
Pick it if
Opus 5.5 at higher effort still falls short on your evals
you run long agent sessions; cache hits bill at 2.5% of input
you run hours-long agentic coding or multistep research over a 1M window
Skip it if
Opus 5.5 covers your workload at 40% of the per-token price
your code forces tool use, prefills replies or sets temperature; all return errors
OpenAI's top GPT-6 model, which OpenAI calls its most capable for the most demanding work. It takes text and images and costs five times GPT-6.1 Sol's per-token rate.
Pick it if
you want OpenAI's top tier for complex reasoning, coding or computer use
you resend long prompts; cache hits bill at 10% of input
you need replies of up to 128K output tokens
Skip it if
GPT-6.1 Sol covers your workload at one-fifth the per-token price
your prompts routinely pass 272K tokens; the whole request then bills higher
FAQ
Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-6 Astra?
On Terminal-Bench 4.0, as each maker reports it, Claude Fable 5.1 scores 55.8% and GPT-6 Astra 57.9%. These are each maker's own numbers, not a controlled head-to-head; the spec table lists every benchmark both publish.
Which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.1 or GPT-6 Astra?
Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 Astra list the same input and output prices. On a coding-agent session (2M tokens in, 60,000 out) Claude Fable 5.1 costs $23.00 and GPT-6 Astra $23.00.
Can I switch between Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 Astra mid-task?
Yes. In an Octomind session, /model octohub:claude-fable-5-1 and /model octohub:gpt-6-astra switch models without losing the conversation, so you can draft on one and review on the other.
Try either model
Switch between models inside the same Octomind session.