Anthropic's Claude model for demanding reasoning and long-horizon agentic work, released as the successor to Fable 5.1. It costs less than 5.1 on input, output and cache, at the same context window; 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 Fable 5.1 today and want lower rates on the same window
you run long agent sessions; cache hits bill at 2.5% of input
skip it if
Opus 5.5 covers your workload at half the per-token price
your code forces tool use, prefills replies, sets temperature or edits earlier turns; all return errors
Anthropic's Claude model for demanding reasoning and long-horizon agentic work, released as the successor to Fable 5. Claude Fable 5.2 replaces it and costs less on every rate.
pick it if
your integration is pinned to 5.1 while you test Fable 5.2
you run long agent sessions; cache hits bill at 2.5% of input
skip it if
you are starting new work; Claude Fable 5.2 costs less on every rate at the same window
your code forces tool use, prefills replies or sets temperature; all return errors
faq
which is better, Claude Fable 5.2 or Claude Fable 5.1?
on Humanity's Last Exam (with tools), as each maker reports it, Claude Fable 5.2 scores 74.2% and Claude Fable 5.1 65.0%. 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 5.2 or Claude Fable 5.1?
Claude Fable 5.2 lists lower input and output prices. on a coding-agent session (2M tokens in, 60,000 out) Claude Fable 5.2 costs $18.40 and Claude Fable 5.1 $23.00.
can i switch between Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Fable 5.1 mid-task?
yes. in an octomind session, /model octohub:claude-fable-5-2 and /model octohub:claude-fable-5-1 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.