I think this release is really going to give them a hard time selling Fable: > On our benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 leads in agentic codin...
I think this release is really going to give them a hard time selling Fable: > On our benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 leads in agentic coding, computer use, and knowledge work. That said, at these levels of capability we’ve found that benchmark margins have become a less reliable guide to real-world differences. In our own use, the gap between Opus 5.5 and Claude Fable 5.1 is narrower than these scores suggest. In general, "benchmark margins have become a less reliable guide to real-world differences" sounds like a big problem. It was certainly the biggest problem with the previous generation of Claude models for a different reason, because the non-code output was nonsensical, and that is not being benchmarked at the moment. But I'm not sure what to make of this admission.
Posted by km144 on Sep 22, 2026, 4:41 PM
Tags
Related issues
Raise real-world problems, find people facing the same issue, and discuss solutions.2,000 issues0 comments
hackernews (Marketing)
I think this release is really going to give them a hard time selling Fable: > On our benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 leads in agentic codin...
My biggest problem with this is that this regulation is only aimed at AI.
Because it works too reliably.
OCaml's type system is quite janky and simplistic compared to Haskell's.
This is a very annoying problem, it's infuriating, you pay 10 USD<->20 USD/mo, and the ads are not even removed.
I think this release is really going to give them a hard time selling Fable: > On our benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 leads in agentic codin...
I think this release is really going to give them a hard time selling Fable: > On our benchmarks, Claude Opus 5.5 leads in agentic coding, computer use, and knowledge work. That said, at these levels of capability we’ve found that benchmark margins have become a less reliable guide to real-world differences. In our own use, the gap between Opus 5.5 and Claude Fable 5.1 is narrower than these scores suggest. In general, "benchmark margins have become a less reliable guide to real-world differences" sounds like a big problem. It was certainly the biggest problem with the previous generation of Claude models for a different reason, because the non-code output was nonsensical, and that is not being benchmarked at the moment. But I'm not sure what to make of this admission.
Comments (0)
No comments yet. Start the discussion.