🎁 Novità Registrati gratis, 10 chiamate le offriamo noi. Fino a $1, senza carta.

Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 5

vs

Quale scegliere e quando — verdetto curato, non una tabella di benchmark

Il bivio in casa Anthropic: Opus 5 a $5/$25 con adaptive thinking che si può disattivare, Fable 5 a $10/$50 dove il thinking è strutturale e sempre attivo. Se il tuo carico di lavoro trae vantaggio dalla disattivazione della deliberazione sulle chiamate semplici, Opus 5 costa la metà ed obbedisce; Fable 5 è per i compiti in cui non vuoi mai che il modello salti il thinking.

Prezzi

Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 5 Δ
Input / 1M token $10 $5
Output / 1M token $50 $25
Lettura cache / 1M token $1 $0.5
Scrittura in cache 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h)

Le tariffe provengono dal catalogo live al momento della build; la pagina di ciascun modello riporta la scheda attuale.

Dove si posizionano — prezzo di input per 1M di token rispetto a tutti gli 63 modelli chat con questa unità di fatturazione (scala logaritmica)

Capacità

Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 5
Utilizzo dei tool
Controllo del ragionamento sempre attivo configurabile
Output strutturato
Prompt caching esplicito (contrassegni il prefisso) esplicito (contrassegni il prefisso)
Durata della cache 5m default, 1h option 5m default, 1h option
Prefisso minimo in cache 1024 token 1024 token

Specifiche

Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 5
Modalità di input testo immagine testo immagine
Modalità di output testo testo
Rilascio 2026-06-09 2026-07-24
Cutoff di conoscenza 2026-01 2026-05
Finestra di contesto 1M 1M
Output massimo 128K 128K
Parametro thinking output_config.effort (thinking.type is adaptive-only and needs no configuration)
  • thinking.type
  • output_config.effort
Valori accettati
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max

both "enabled" and "disabled" return 400

thinking.type
  • adaptive
  • disabled
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max
Predefinito

thinking always on (adaptive)

effort
  • high

thinking on

effort
  • high (Claude API and Claude Code)

Le specifiche sono trascritte dalla documentazione di ciascun fornitore; una riga che un fornitore non pubblica viene omessa anziché essere dedotta. Fonti complete: Claude Fable 5 · Claude Opus 5

Un solo prompt, entrambi i modelli — misurati attraverso il gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. VERIFICA esattamente 3 frasi

Claude Fable 5 superato · 3 sentences

When we enabled reasoning, the model began generating extensive internal "thinking" tokens before each answer, and those tokens are billed as output even though users never see them. Output tokens typically cost several times more than input tokens, so adding thousands of hidden reasoning tokens per request effectively multiplied our per-query cost. In short, we're paying for a much longer response behind the scenes in exchange for higher answer quality, and we can manage this by tuning reasoning effort levels or reserving reasoning mode for complex tasks only.

out 228 tok latenza 6.7 s

Claude Opus 5 superato · 3 sentences

When reasoning is enabled, the model generates a hidden chain of "thinking" tokens before it writes the visible answer, and those internal tokens are billed at the output rate even though no one ever sees them — commonly 3–10x more tokens than the response itself. Because output tokens are priced several times higher than input tokens, that added volume hits us at our most expensive rate, which is why the bill roughly doubled while our request count stayed flat. The spend is controllable: we can cap the reasoning budget per call, route only genuinely hard requests to reasoning mode and cheaper models for the rest, and track cost per successfully completed task rather than cost per token, since a single correct answer usually beats three cheap retries plus human cleanup.

out 529 tok latenza 9.0 s

Rispetto dell'istruzione (esattamente tre frasi — contabili), adattamento al pubblico (registro da CFO), e il divario di fatturazione del pensiero nascosto che i contatori di token qui sotto rivelano.

PROMPT This function is supposed to return the longest run of consecutive equal items, but callers report it is off by one on single-element inputs and misses runs that end at the last index. Fix it and explain the bug in one paragraph. VERIFICA la correzione supera i test

Claude Fable 5 superato · 8/8 cases

## Fixed code ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 best = max(best, cur) return best ``` ## Explanation The original function counts **adjacent equal pairs** rather than **items in a run**: a run of length *n* contains only *n − 1* equal neighbor pairs, so every result is off by one — a single-element list yields 0 instead of 1, and `[1, 2, 2]` yields 1 instead of 2 (which callers perceive as "missing" the run at the end). The fix is to initialize both `cur` and `best` to 1 (any nonempty list has a run of at least length 1), reset `cur` to 1 rather than 0 when

out 531 tok latenza 12.5 s

Claude Opus 5 superato · 8/8 cases

## Fixed version ```python def longest_run(xs): if not xs: return 0 best = 1 cur = 1 for i in range(1, len(xs)): if xs[i] == xs[i - 1]: cur += 1 else: cur = 1 if cur > best: best = cur return best ``` ## The bug The counters were tracking the wrong quantity: `cur` counted *matching adjacent pairs* rather than *elements in the current run*, and both counters started at `0` instead of `1`. Since a run of length *n* contains only *n − 1* adjacent equal pairs, every result came back one too small — `[1, 1]` returned 1, `[3, 3, 3]` returned 2 — and a single-element list returned 0 because the loop body never executed and `best` kept its initial value of `0`. […]

out 1094 tok latenza 16.1 s

Se la correzione è davvero giusta (eseguibile), la densità della spiegazione, e l'efficienza in token su un compito delimitato.

PROMPT Extract a JSON object with fields {company, quarter, revenue_usd_m, growth_pct, guidance} from this text. Use null for anything not stated; add no other fields. VERIFICA JSON valido, schema esatto

Claude Fable 5 superato · 5/5 fields, guidance null

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3 (September quarter)", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": null } ``` Notes on interpretation: "up eleven and change" is rendered as 11 (the precise figure isn't stated), and guidance is null because it was explicitly withheld.

out 192 tok latenza 6.5 s

Claude Opus 5 superato · 5/5 fields, guidance "Withheld pending Q4 close"

```json { "company": "Meridian Robotics", "quarter": "Q3", "revenue_usd_m": 412, "growth_pct": 11, "guidance": "Withheld pending Q4 close" } ``` Notes on judgment calls: - **quarter**: "September quarter" is labeled Q3 because the text refers to an upcoming "Q4 close," implying a calendar-aligned fiscal year. No fiscal year is given. - **revenue_usd_m**: 412 is stated as constant-currency and hedged ("call it"), so it's approximate; the currency is not explicitly stated as USD. - **growth_pct**: "up eleven and change" means slightly more than 11, so 11 is a floor rather than an exact figure.

out 539 tok latenza 7.6 s

Aderenza allo schema (nessun campo inventato), pressione di allucinazione (guidance è esplicitamente sospesa), e differenze nel percorso di output strutturato.

PROMPT Write a 120-word product announcement for an API gateway feature that caches prompts across providers. Forbidden words: "seamless", "unlock", "game-changer", "revolutionize", "empower". Exactly one sentence must be a question. VERIFICA 120 parole, 0 parole vietate

Claude Fable 5 superato · 120 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching for our API Gateway** Starting today, your repeated prompts are cached once and reused across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and any other provider you route through the gateway. Instead of paying full token costs every time your application sends the same system prompt or context block, the gateway detects matching prefixes and serves cached results in milliseconds. Why keep spending money and latency on identical requests? Early adopters report cost reductions of up to 60 percent on high-volume workloads, along with faster median response times. Configuration is simple: enable caching in your dashboard, set a TTL, and choose which routes participate. Cache entries are encrypted at rest and never shared between accounts. Available now on all plans.

out 1173 tok latenza 18.2 s

Claude Opus 5 superato · 123 words, 0 banned, 1 question

**Cross-Provider Prompt Caching** We're introducing Cross-Provider Prompt Caching in the API Gateway. Repeated system prompts, long documents, and few-shot examples are stored once at the gateway layer and reused across OpenAI, Anthropic, Google, and self-hosted models. Instead of paying full input token costs on every request, your application sends a cache reference, and the gateway rehydrates the context before forwarding it downstream. Why does that matter? Teams running high-volume agents and retrieval pipelines typically see input token spend fall 40 to 70 percent, with median latency dropping by several hundred milliseconds. Caches are scoped per project, encrypted at rest, and invalidated automatically when a prompt template changes. Enable it with a single header, and see the docs for TTL tuning and per-route controls.

out 1593 tok latenza 19.1 s

Rispetto dei vincoli (budget di parole, elenco di parole vietate, l'unica domanda), impronta stilistica, e controllo della lunghezza.

Passa dall'uno all'altro con una sola riga

Entrambi gli id sono presenti in ogni scheda qui sotto — la coppia di righe evidenziata è l'unica modifica. Stesso endpoint, stessa chiave, stessa struttura della richiesta.

from openai import OpenAI

client = OpenAI(
    base_url="https://synthorai.io/v1",
    api_key="sk-syn-...",
)

resp = client.chat.completions.create(
    model="claude-fable-5",
    # model="claude-opus-5",  # decommenta questa riga, commenta quella sopra
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Ottieni una chiave API →

FAQ

Qual è più economico, Claude Fable 5 o Claude Opus 5?

Claude Opus 5 è più economico per input / 1m token ($5 contro $10, 2.0× di differenza). Altre righe potrebbero indicare il contrario — la tabella sopra riporta la scheda completa, e il costo reale dipende dal tuo mix.

Posso fare un A/B test di Claude Fable 5 contro Claude Opus 5 senza due integrazioni?

Sì. Entrambi sono serviti tramite lo stesso endpoint compatibile con OpenAI con una singola chiave API — il passaggio richiede la modifica della stringa del modello in una sola riga, quindi puoi instradare una frazione del traffico verso ciascuno e confrontare direttamente le fatture.

Claude Fable 5 e Claude Opus 5 supportano il prompt caching?

Sì — entrambi fatturano le letture in cache a un prezzo inferiore rispetto alla loro tariffa di input, quindi i carichi di lavoro con warm-prefix costano meno di quanto suggeriscano le tariffe di listino. Le righe esatte per la lettura in cache si trovano nella tabella dei prezzi qui sopra.

Confronti correlati

Dai nostri studi misurati