Anthropic 发布 Claude Fable 5.2，Artificial Analysis 智能指数…
Anthropic has released Claude Fable 5.2, taking the #1 spot on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v5 at 65, led by gains in science, knowledge, and codi
Anthropic 发布 Claude Fable 5.2，在 Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v5 上以 65 分（max effort）排名第一，领先 Gemini 4 Carbon（high，60）5 分、Claude Opus 5.5（max，59）6 分。提升主要来自科学推理、知识与 FrontierCode 2.0，在 HLE-Diamond 上达到 80%（此前最佳为 Gemini 4 Carbon 的 69%）。定价为每 1M 输入/输出 token 8/40 美元，较 Fable 5.1 降低 20%，但 max effort 下平均每任务成本 26.5 美元，约为 Opus 5.5（10.0 美元）的 2.6 倍；上下文窗口为 100 万 token，支持图像与文本输入，提供五档 effort 设置。
推荐理由
精选AI 评分 81
第三方评测给出 Fable 5.2 与 Opus 5.5、Gemini 4 Carbon 的多项对比，可据此判断能力提升集中在哪些方向。
主题
正文
Anthropic has released Claude Fable 5.2, taking the #1 spot on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v5 at 65, led by gains in science, knowledge, and coding
At max effort it scores 65, 5 points ahead of Gemini 4 Carbon (high, 60) and 6 ahead of Claude Opus 5.5 (max, 59). Gains are driven by scientific reasoning, knowledge and FrontierCode 2.0, and roughly matching Opus 5.5 on AA-Briefcase and Terminal-Bench 4.0.
Priced at $8/$40 per 1M input/output tokens, a 20% reduction from Fable 5.1, Claude Fable 5.2 averages a Cost per Task of $26.5 with max effort, a ~2.6x increase compared to Opus 5.5 (max, $10.0) and ~2x compared to Fable 5.1 (max, $12.99)
Key takeaways:
➤ Claude Fable 5.2 leads 5 of the 9 evaluations in the Intelligence Index: At max effort, Fable 5.2 scores 65, ahead of Gemini 4 Carbon (high, 60), Claude Opus 5.5 (max, 59) and GPT-6 Astra (max, 57), and ~15 points above Claude Fable 5.1 (max, 49). It sets the highest scores on HLE-Diamond (80%, previous best 69% from Gemini 4 Carbon), AA-Omniscience v1.1 (67, previous best 54 from Gemini 4 Carbon), Terminal-Bench-Science (73%, previous best 65% from Gemini 4 Carbon), CritPt v2 hard subset (77%, previous best 72% from GPT-6 Astra) and FrontierCode 2.0 (49%, previous best 46% from Claude Opus 5.5)
➤ Less progress in agentic knowledge work and terminal coding: Claude Fable 5.2 improves on Fable 5.1 across capabilities, but sometimes only to Opus 5.5 levels. It reaches 1785 Elo on AA-Briefcase, within the confidence interval of Opus 5.5 (1800) and just behind Claude Sonnet 5.5 (1813). On GDP.pdf it reaches 24% all-pass against 26% for Opus 5.5. On Terminal-Bench 4.0 it scores 60%, level with Opus 5.5 and behind Kimi K3.1 Pro (67%), Gemini 4 Carbon (65%) and Sonnet 5.5 (64%). AutomationBench-AA is an exception, at 76% against 70% for Opus 5.5, narrowly behind Gemini 4 Carbon, 78%
➤ Lower efforts still take leading positions: With high and xhigh effort, Claude Fable 5.2 scores 62, ahead of every other model at any effort, using 98k output tokens per task against 173k for Opus 5.5 (max). At max effort Fable 5.2 costs ~2.6x more than Opus 5.5, but at lower effort settings it can outperform Opus 5.5 at lower cost per task
Other model details:
➤ Context window: 1 million tokens with image and text input
➤ Pricing: $8/$40 per 1M input/output tokens; cache writes $10 with 5-minute TTL, $16 with 1-hour TTL, and cache reads $0.20
➤ Effort settings: five (low, medium, high, xhigh, max). Intelligence Index evaluations were run at all five with Anthropic's default fallback enabled
Congratulations to @AnthropicAI on this impressive release!