Claude Opus 5.5 price-performance comparison with Fable 5.1

Claude Opus 5.5 price-performance comparison with Fable 5.1: Claude Opus 5.5 is the first model in the Claude 5.5 family and performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 on most tasks, as reported in the comparative results. Opus 5.5 runs at 20% lower cost than Opus 5 and is 60% cheaper than Fable 5.1. This introduction addresses the model designation, task-level parity with Fable 5.1, and the stated percentage differences in running cost overall, as reported.

This summary reports the provided benchmark scores for Terminal‑Bench 4.0 and FrontierCode for Opus 5.5, Fable 5.1, and GPT‑6 Astra. Terminal‑Bench 4.0 scores are Opus 5.5 66.4%, GPT‑6 Astra 57.9%, and Fable 5.1 55.8%. FrontierCode scores are Opus 5.5 54.4% and Fable 5.1 50.3%. All numbers are drawn from the provided data.

GDPval‑AA v2.1 values in the provided data are Opus 5.5 1846, Fable 5.1 1735, and Opus 5 1708. AutomationBench scores in the provided data are GPT‑6 Astra 41.4% and Opus 5.5 40.0%. The provided figures list multiple benchmark results across the four named models.

Notable rankings in the provided dataset include Opus 5.5 having the highest Terminal‑Bench 4.0 percentage and the highest GDPval‑AA v2.1 value among the listed models, while GPT‑6 Astra has the highest AutomationBench percentage. FrontierCode in the provided data shows Opus 5.5 above Fable 5.1.

Anthropic CEO Dario Amodei published an essay calling to slow down AI capability gains. That essay included the sentence: “We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of AI models.” The record presents that sentence as a direct quotation from his essay.

Operator Lovable characterized the earlier model as “steadier, with far less variance run to run” than what came before it. Lovable stated that Anthropic is making the same efficiency pitch for Opus 5.5. Opus 5.5 costs 20% less to run than Opus 5, and is 60% cheaper than Fable 5.1.

These excerpts present Dario Amodei’s call to slow AI capability gains and Lovable’s comments on model steadiness and efficiency. They also include stated cost comparisons among Opus 5.5, Opus 5, and Fable 5.1.

Opus 5 launched in July and outscored Fable 5 on most benchmarks. Fable 5.1 arrived in early September and beat Opus 5 on every benchmark published by Anthropic. Claude Opus 5.5 is the first model in the Claude 5.5 family. Opus 5.5 performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 on most tasks.

Opus 5.5 costs 20% less to run than Opus 5. Opus 5.5 is 60% cheaper than Fable 5.1. Opus 5.5 closes the gap on price rather than raw scores. Lovable stated that the earlier model was “steadier, with far less variance run to run” and that the same efficiency pitch is being made for Opus 5.5.

The sequence above records the launch order and the reported shifts in benchmarking and pricing among the models. These statements reflect the details provided.

Claude Opus 5.5 is the first model in the Claude 5.5 family and performs at the level of Claude Fable 5.1 on most tasks as reported in the provided material. Opus 5.5 runs at 20% lower cost than Opus 5 and is 60% cheaper than Fable 5.1, and the provided account states that Opus 5.5 closes the gap on price rather than raw scores. These statements summarize the reported price-performance relationship between Claude Opus 5.5 and Claude Fable 5.1 without introducing additional data or analysis.