🎁 Novo Cadastre-se grátis, 10 chamadas por nossa conta. Até US$ 1, sem cartão.

Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 5

vs

Qual usar, quando — veredito curado, não uma tabela de benchmark

A própria encruzilhada da Anthropic: Opus 5 a $5/$25 com pensamento adaptativo que você pode desativar, Fable 5 a $10/$50 onde o pensamento é estrutural e sempre ativo. Se a sua carga de trabalho se beneficia de desativar a deliberação em chamadas simples, o Opus 5 custa metade do preço e obedece; o Fable 5 é para trabalhos nos quais você nunca quer que o modelo pule o pensamento.

Preços

Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 5 Δ
Entrada / 1M tokens $10 $5
Saída / 1M tokens $50 $25
Leitura de cache / 1M tokens $1 $0.5
Escrita de cache 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h) 1.25x (5m) / 2x (1h)

Tarifas do catálogo em tempo real no momento do build; a página de cada modelo contém o cartão atual.

Onde eles se posicionam — preço de entrada por 1M tokens entre todos os 63 modelos de chat nesta unidade de cobrança (escala logarítmica)

Capacidades

Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 5
Uso de ferramentas sim sim
Controle de raciocínio sempre ativo configurável
Saída estruturada sim sim
Cache de prompt explícito (você marca o prefixo) explícito (você marca o prefixo)
Tempo de vida do cache 5m default, 1h option 5m default, 1h option
Prefixo mínimo em cache 1024 tokens 1024 tokens

Especificações

Claude Fable 5 Claude Opus 5
Modalidades de entrada texto imagem texto imagem
Modalidades de saída texto texto
Lançamento 2026-06-09 2026-07-24
Corte de conhecimento 2026-01 2026-05
Janela de contexto 1M 1M
Saída máxima 128K 128K
Parâmetro de raciocínio output_config.effort (thinking.type is adaptive-only and needs no configuration)
  • thinking.type
  • output_config.effort
Valores aceitos
effort
  • low
  • medium
  • high
  • xhigh
  • max

both "enabled" and "disabled" return 400

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

thinking always on (adaptive)

effort
  • high

thinking on

effort
  • high (Claude API and Claude Code)

As especificações são transcritas da documentação de cada fornecedor; uma linha que um fornecedor não publica é omitida em vez de ser inferida. Fontes completas: Claude Fable 5 · Claude Opus 5

Um prompt, ambos os modelos — medidos pelo gateway

PROMPT Explain to a CFO, in exactly three sentences, why our LLM bill doubled after we enabled reasoning. VERIFICAR exatamente 3 frases

Claude Fable 5 passou · 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.

saída 228 tok latência 6.7 s

Claude Opus 5 passou · 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.

saída 529 tok latência 9.0 s

Cumprimento da instrução (exatamente três frases — contáveis), ajuste ao público (registro de CFO), e a lacuna de cobrança do pensamento oculto que os medidores de tokens abaixo expõem.

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. VERIFICAR a correção passa nos testes

Claude Fable 5 passou · 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

saída 531 tok latência 12.5 s

Claude Opus 5 passou · 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`. […]

saída 1094 tok latência 16.1 s

Se a correção é de fato certa (executável), a densidade da explicação, e a eficiência em tokens numa tarefa delimitada.

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. VERIFICAR JSON válido, esquema exato

Claude Fable 5 passou · 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.

saída 192 tok latência 6.5 s

Claude Opus 5 passou · 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.

saída 539 tok latência 7.6 s

Obediência ao esquema (sem campos inventados), pressão de alucinação (guidance é explicitamente retida), e diferenças no caminho de saída estruturada.

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. VERIFICAR 120 palavras, 0 palavras proibidas

Claude Fable 5 passou · 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.

saída 1173 tok latência 18.2 s

Claude Opus 5 passou · 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.

saída 1593 tok latência 19.1 s

Obediência às restrições (orçamento de palavras, lista de palavras proibidas, a única pergunta), impressão digital de estilo, e controle de comprimento.

Alterne entre eles com uma linha

Ambos os IDs estão em todas as abas abaixo — o par de linhas destacado é a única edição. Mesmo endpoint, mesma chave, mesmo formato de requisição.

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",  # descomente esta linha, comente a linha acima
    messages=[{"role": "user", "content": "Summarize this diff"}],
    reasoning_effort="medium",
)
print(resp.choices[0].message.content)

Obter uma chave de API →

FAQ

Qual é mais barato, Claude Fable 5 ou Claude Opus 5?

Claude Opus 5 é mais barato em entrada / 1m tokens ($5 vs $10, com 2.0× de diferença). Outras linhas podem apontar para o outro lado — a tabela acima traz o quadro completo, e o custo real depende do seu mix.

Posso fazer um teste A/B de Claude Fable 5 contra Claude Opus 5 sem duas integrações?

Sim. Ambos são servidos pelo mesmo endpoint compatível com OpenAI com uma única chave de API — a troca é uma alteração de uma linha na string do modelo, de modo que você pode rotear uma fração do tráfego para cada um e comparar as faturas diretamente.

Claude Fable 5 e Claude Opus 5 suportam prompt caching?

Sim — ambos cobram leituras em cache abaixo da sua taxa de entrada, então cargas de trabalho com warm-prefix custam menos do que as taxas listadas sugerem. As linhas exatas de leitura em cache estão na tabela de preços acima.

Comparações relacionadas

De nossos estudos medidos