Loading model…
anthropic/claude-fable-524/29 in v2 — Resilience, score 64.46%, pass rate 56.43% (259/459)4.03s, output speed 187.11 tok/s$18.57, prompt tokens 45,972, completion tokens 365,99196.67% pass rate (58/60), score 257/26188.89% pass rate (8/9)96.67% pass rate (29/30), score 132/15010% pass rate (6/60), score 230/54130% pass rate (18/60), score 408/54135% pass rate (21/60), score 208/512claude-fable-5 (64.46%, 56.43%) trails gpt-5.5 (77.90%, 61.87%), gpt-5.3-codex (77.66%, 61.22%), and qwen3.7-max (75.27%, 54.90%).Ranked 24/29 in Resilience, claude-fable-5 shows solid coding and cost skills but significant gaps in refactoring, reasoning, and security. Suitable for lightweight coding tasks; high-risk for complex refactoring or security-critical deployments.
Overall score % from merged run_models rows (chronological). Only runs that include this model appear as points.
Score % vs pass rate % per category. With 0/1 scorers, both usually line up; with proportional tests, score % reflects partial credit while pass rate counts tests that clear the fixture threshold.
Total estimated spend per scope for this model (bars, left axis) and mean spend per merged result row (line, right axis: total ÷ tests).
Pass rate % per difficulty level — complements the score % view above.
Normalized 0–100 within this model: TTFT (shorter → higher spoke) and decode tok/s (higher → higher spoke). Values come from streamed BLXBench runs merged into overall_ranking.json.
Pass rate % per category for this model (distinct from score %, which reflects partial credit).