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
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 5.2 or GPT-6 Astra?
on Humanity's Last Exam (with tools), as each maker reports it, Claude Fable 5.2 scores 74.2% and GPT-6 Astra 57.2%. 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 GPT-6 Astra?
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 GPT-6 Astra $23.00.
can i switch between Claude Fable 5.2 and GPT-6 Astra mid-task?
yes. in an octomind session, /model octohub:claude-fable-5-2 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.