unbiased ai

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Fable 5

Fable 5 costs 2x Opus 4.8 on the rate card ($10/$50 vs $5/$25 per million) and also spends its tokens less frugally: our metered task cost $0.1462 on Fable 5 and $0.0724 on Opus 4.8.

List rates July 2026; bills metered the same day, same prompt, same harness.

or match your spend in credits

Claude Opus 4.8

The previous flagship, the quiet bargain of the ladder

$5 / $25 in / out, per Mtok

This task, metered
$0.0724Same fixed prompt on every model, run the same day, priced from the provider's own bill, not token estimates. Raw outputs are in the Fable 5 pricing breakdown.
Tokens on this task
2,877Tokens billed on the identical task in the July 2026 run. Opus 5 spent 4,610 on the same job, on the same rates.
Output over input
5x

Fable 5

The frontier model, API-only since Jul 7

$10 / $50 in / out, per Mtok

This task, metered
$0.1462Same fixed prompt on every model, run the same day, priced from the provider's own bill, not token estimates. Raw outputs are in the Fable 5 pricing breakdown.
Access
API usage creditsFable 5 left the Claude subscription plans on Jul 7, 2026. Subscriptions had carried weekly usage limits since summer 2025, metered in 5-hour session windows.
Output over input
5x

The tale of the tape, receipts included. Any number with an i button carries its method note; hover it, tap it, or tab to it.

The short version

2xthe rate-card gap: $10 / $50 against $5 / $25Provider list rates for July 2026, per million tokens, input and output.
50.5%less on the meter for the same task, choosing Opus 4.8$0.1462 against $0.0724 on the same task, a difference of $0.0738.
$0.0738saved per task on the meter, Opus 4.8 over Fable 5
2.6xcheaper: one real coding session, priced with and without prompt cachingA real Claude Code session ledger: $0.5887 total across five API calls. The full breakdown is in the ledger section below.

One task, two bills

The fixed dashboard build we meter every model against. Bars scale to the bills; flip to the rate card to check it against the meter.

Fable 5$0.1462
Claude Opus 4.8$0.0724
Pareto, the blend$0.0196

The card said 2x and the meter agreed: $0.1462 against $0.0724 lands right at double. Frugal token spend kept the card honest here; on the Opus 5 page it does not. The blend ran the same task for $0.0196.

Upper bar is the input rate, lower bar the output rate, dollars per million tokens.

Fable 5$10 in / $50 out
Claude Opus 4.8$5 in / $25 out
Pareto, the blendper-token credits

No fixed card. The blend picks a provider per request and bills the tokens it used.

Output tokens bill at five times input on both cards, so a model's writing habits set the real bill. The metered view shows the result.

25
$109.65Fable 5, a month of this task
$54.30Opus 4.8, a month of this task
$14.70Pareto, a month of this task

At 25 tasks a day, Opus 4.8 runs $55.35 a month under Fable 5 on this task. The blend runs $94.95 under.

Straight multiplication: tasks a day, times 30, times the metered per-task bill. Your tasks will differ. Meter them.

When the 2x is worth it

If your hardest tasks fail on 4.8 and succeed on Fable 5, the 2x buys you outcomes and is cheap. If both succeed, you are paying double for the same result. The way to know is not a benchmark chart, it is running your own workload on both and reading the two bills.

A real session, priced

Rate cards price tokens; agent sessions read far more than they write, and caching reprices the whole thing. One real Claude Code working session, straight off the console bill:

Session ledger: Claude Code

API calls5
Read vs written78x more readTokens read into context versus tokens written out, same session, from the usage log.
Prompt caching2.6x cheaperThe same session priced with and without prompt caching, same rates, same tokens.
Session total$0.5887

Call it $0.59. Five calls, one working session, July 2026.

Why it belongs on this page: 4.8's frugality is a workload property, not a chart property. Caching, read-heavy context, and token appetite move real bills more than list prices do. The model card publishes seven same-harness benchmarks with both bills; across them, the blend's per-task cost ran 6 to 38 cents on the Opus 5 dollar.

The whole field, July 2026

List rates per provider. Metered bills: the same fixed task, same day, priced from provider bills. Sort any column.

July 2026 rate cards and metered task bills across models
Model Notes
Fable 5$10$50$0.1462Left Claude subscription plans Jul 7; API usage credits
GPT-5.6 Sol$5$30not runOutput prices at 6x input on this card
Claude Opus 5$5$25$0.1158Launched Jul 24; same card as Opus 4.8
Claude Opus 4.8$5$25$0.0724The previous flagship
Kimi K3$3$15queuedAPI live Jul 16; cache-hit input $0.30; flat across context
Terra$2.50$15not run
Sonnet 5$2$10$0.0410Intro card to Aug 31; then $3 / $15
Luna$1$6not run
Haiku 4.5off-listoff-list$0.0162Metered in the same run; its card is not tracked on this page
Pareto, the blendcreditscredits$0.0196Blended per request; receipts on the model card

Rates move. Dated changes are on the timeline below, and the biggest scheduled one has a countdown.

How the prices moved

Nov 2025: Opus cut 67%

Claude Opus went from $15 / $75 to $5 / $25 per million, a 67% cut. That is the card Opus 4.8 still runs on today, and the reason it reads like a bargain beside the frontier.

Next scheduled move: Sonnet 5 intro pricing ends Sep 1, 2026.

Method and caveats

How the metered bills are made

One harness, every model, the same day: identical prompts, standard retries, no per-model tuning. Cost is read off the provider's bill per completed task, never estimated from token math. The model card publishes seven same-harness benchmarks with both bills, losses included.

Why the rate card alone misleads

Cards price tokens; bills price behavior. On the identical task, Opus 5 billed 4,610 tokens where Opus 4.8 billed 2,877, about 60% more, on the same rates. Output tokens run 5 to 6x input across the July cards, so verbosity compounds fast.

The second task we meter

A fixed game build, metered the same way: Fable 5 billed $0.2269, the blend billed $0.0220. Task shape moves bills more than rate cards do, which is why we publish per-task receipts instead of one blended average.

What routing adds in latency

Twenty streamed runs, gateway against direct: median time to first token was 68ms slower through the gateway, and p95 through the gateway beat direct. The routing tax is measurable, small, and published.

3/4of an English word, roughly one token; a million tokens is about 750k words
5 to 6xoutput rate over input rate across the July 2026 cards
78xmore tokens read than written in the real session above, which is why caching matters

New head-to-heads land by email first

Same harness, both models, bills published beside scores. One email per matchup, the day it lands. Nothing else.

One request in, one answer out: the blend picks per request, so you skip this choice entirely.

Get your credits matched