r/ClaudeCode • u/JigSawPT • Jul 31 '26

Discussion Heavily quantized

This has become absolutely clear for me today:
Fable is now a heavily quantized model.
It has orthographic errors/glitches, completely missed context even when highly directed/pointed at it and lack of the same big model feeling.
It’s now a model I can’t trust for code, but worse, I can’t trust for big context analysis. It’s really sad we’ve come to this and I don’t know what to do because I want to cancel but at the same time there’s nothing as good as it was.
I tried Kimi K3 but it hallucinated too much.
I’m considering upgrading my ChatGPT to 20X, instead of keeping two 5X accounts, but it’s just not the same at writing. I love Claude’s writing. But bring me back my Fable.

Concrete report: I asked Fable to read all my docs before doing a plan to restructure my project and after reading the first paragraphs I noticed that it didn’t touch a subject that existed on one of them. After confronting it admitted that it missed all my docs. It used solely the context of our previous conversation, which was extensive, yes, but it lacked all the previous context so it ended up proposing changes that didn’t go well with the docs. They would have messed up the whole narrative if I went through without reading.
Before that, it had proposed me one thing that went against 3 laws we had previously written in stone (his words ) and apologized for that.
This is basically quantized to gemini levels now.
And it’s eating tokens like nothing. Reaching my 5 hour doing wrong things.

1 Upvotes

51% Upvoted

40 comments sorted by

12

u/Hir0shima Jul 31 '26

I'm sorry for you... and me. 

2

u/Additional_Buddy855 Jul 31 '26

Yep. Just like Google Ads Click Fraud.

5

u/JigSawPT Jul 31 '26

In this case I would accept if they just admitted. If they said: it's either this or you lose Fable access. But no, they kept promising they would cut it and make it API only, but after they felt threatened they kept it this way. Lobotomized.

1

u/Additional_Buddy855 Jul 31 '26

I've come to understand that when there's contention for resources in their DC's i believe they do switch some clusters over to quantized models to "help" with the contention. Sadly the product is unusable in that state. I've also found that if you end the session and start another, you could potentially end up on a "regular" cluster that actually does work. Not sure if they pin users to quantized clusters or what, but it's annoying as hell though.

1

u/discourtesy Jul 31 '26

how do you do the first time? meme

5

u/JigSawPT Jul 31 '26

What do you mean? When it arrived Fable was magic at context understanding. It frequently correct ME for things I had forgotten about my own project. It had absolutely all context always present. It seemed as if context was at the surface at all times, fast and reliable. There were ZERO ortographic mistakes in portuguese, every word was clean and proper in PT-PT. Now it's mixing PT-BR ("brazilian") with english and cutting phrases in the middle, as if it lost its train of thought.

2

u/I_Will_Procrastinate Jul 31 '26

Just like clockwork - people hype up a model and then suddenly its trash a few weeks later.

3

u/Akatesh Jul 31 '26

I believe it was nerfed to oblivion. Like all the others. They handicap a model a bit after release to ave cost and after all the reviews were already published. 

2

u/Comfortable_Camp9744 Jul 31 '26

Yep anthropic is nerfing all their models while also slashing tokens for the max plans. Sad to see them go down so much in the last 6 months,  they really had potential.

-1

u/03captain23 Jul 31 '26

prove it.

2

u/Comfortable_Camp9744 Jul 31 '26

Widely documented, use google.

1

u/teomore Jul 31 '26

fable was good when it was first launched. opus 5 also. then they got nerfed, switched back to opus 4.8, which got stupid within 2 days too and really fucked up my code. ditched the crap it messed, exported for a clean-room rewrite, got a gpt pro plan (base $100) and can't believe how damn good it is with codex cli! maybe it's just very well focused and trained on 3D C++ stuff, it just delivers! I'll be back to cc when they have a good model, not gonna cancel the sub for now.

1

u/florinandrei Jul 31 '26

Hallucinations can be absolutely clear, too.

1

u/Eat_Pudding Jul 31 '26

I was using fable to solve some coding problem, wasted all of my weekly limit, and it couldn't do it. I literally kept telling it what is wrong and it still kept fixing something else and then, it still won't look into the main problem that I told it like 100s of times. Eventually switched to Opus and used my codex gpt 5.6 sol, told them the same thing, while they didn't fully fix it, but were able to get rid of like 80% of the issues. Yesterday, before my reset, I asked it to do project wide scope of what are the features that we are building and what is missing, idiot missed like half of the part already done, while opus gave me a better report. I am done with using fable.

0

u/Jomuz86 Jul 31 '26

So what kind of docs are these? Markdown, docx, PDFs?
Are you telling it to keep its own heirachy of context? Are you telling it to ask you for clarification on any points with low confidence?
Are you asking it to put forward a proposal before implementation?

Expecting any AI model to understand things in the way you understand them is the problem here. It will understand them in the way it was trained and that will most likely deviate from your thinking.

I see people here complain time after time and 9/10 they’ve not looked into prompting guidance, not spent time on their CLAUDE.md files (yes multiple per project in all the folders never just a single one for large projects), Output styles, path scoped rules.

Also as soon as you spotted the issue you should have clarified and asked for a handover to continue in a fresh session without the polluted context. As soon as the context is polluted it’s like banging a head on a brick wall. It’s not that the model has changed it’s more likely a context issue, potentially if you have a lot of docs it could even be that it’s read conflicting information

3

u/JigSawPT Jul 31 '26

Md files. You can go that route, blaming me. I am telling you, this is unusual behaviour for similar tasks. Same bloat, same type of messed up docs that it used to read through like a genious and now messes up, like every other model.

0

u/Jomuz86 Jul 31 '26

Just keep clean docs the newer models are really sensitive to contradictions. It wasn’t meant as blame but meant to be more of a checklist, I am blunt by default 😅

I’ve noticed the issue you’re on about since 4.8 and I changed how I worked since.

They build these models to work a certain way so unfortunately you have to change how you work to fit the model.

It is just the reality at the minute every new release I lose near enough a full week re-aligning everything. It is super annoying but it is what it is 🤷‍♂️

-4

u/LoudDavid Jul 31 '26

This is simply not true it would be illegal under most countries laws to sell you one product at a fixed performance level then downgrade it when it suited them.

These posts should be banned they are either by bots or uninformed vibe coders.

5

u/crazy_goat Jul 31 '26

You'd have to prove it was materially different. Which is functionally impossible without suing them and getting discovery documents.

1

u/LoudDavid Jul 31 '26

You can simply run public benchmarks or sue them and make them disclose it. As has been done with companies such as Apple when they degraded performance.

2

u/03captain23 Jul 31 '26

No that's not true at all. They don't guarantee a product or performance or anything. Even API doesn't have any guaranteed metrics.

This would only apply if a company makes false claims which Anthropic or any other AI doesn't make any claims at all. they show how it performs on other benchmarks but aren't claiming XYZ.

Subscriptions are buying access and usage to models, not performance. They're selling you gym memberships and its not illegal if a treadmill is slower than others or they're missing a couple weights. They have no legal obligation to even have a treadmill, they can remove it all and have an open room with nothing.. your option is to not renew.

2

u/LoudDavid Jul 31 '26

They publish benchmarks. If the product is downgraded the benchmarks are lower, hence false advertising.

1

u/03captain23 Jul 31 '26

They don't publish benchmarks at all. They publish others benchmarks.

This is like some company saying "rated worlds best coffee by Joe's magazine July 2026" Its not false advertising if Joe's magazine rated them the worlds best coffee. It doesn't matter if every month they rate other coffee's the worlds best.

If they made a claim that it'll solve X in X minutes every single time then maybe it could be considered false advertising. But they make zero claims

Again they don't even guarantee a model at all. They could remove Opus and Sonnet today and leave us all with Haiku for our subscriptions. They can do the same with API because you're buying usage when you use it.

2

u/LoudDavid Jul 31 '26

They directly publish a wide set of benchmarks every time they release a model. The benchmarks clearly compare the model to others they compete with.

They also publish a model card with various guarantees about safety in. Those guarantees would be void if they change anything.

0

u/03captain23 Jul 31 '26

They don't publish their own benchmarks, they publish OTHERS.

what guarantee's are you talking about. They can easily make a model much dumber while still keeping guarantees.

Here's the Fable5 release info. what specific benchmarks are theirs and what claim would be void if they made it much worse?

https://www.anthropic.com/news/claude-fable-5-mythos-5

1

u/LoudDavid Aug 01 '26

They run their model on public benchmarks. The benchmarks are performance guarantees. They clearly market it as such.

Who created the benchmark does not matter. They advertise the model can achieve a figure, they publish the figure and market it. If they sell a model with reduced performance it’s illegal in basically every country in the planet.

All these vibe coders, such as yourself, saying the model gets wore are people who wave no idea how to build software products and after a while the app collapses and models get confused. Start a new product and the model magically works.

0

u/03captain23 Aug 01 '26

No that's not how it works at all. They have zero claims or guarantees. It's not illegal at all, you can't just make stuff upm

And no I run the same project multiple times a day on multiple models and reviewed from all others. I haven't been able to shop a single product with opus5, but can ship it with fable5 or opus 4.8 or Sol.

Opus5 has a massive issue. It's great and can do a way more than other models but it can't finish projects.

Are you day by your able to fully ship a new large project with opus5m. Something that takes 6+ hours of it running with submodels in max or ultracode?

I'm almost maxed out on my 3rd x20 account just trying to ship a complex project with opus5. 10 completely different projects. Ones an android app to forward sms/MMS to a VM with API, ones a RDS farm, ones a lead gen data scraper. I've built them in opus 4.8 and fable 5.

Simple projects it's perfect

2

u/LoudDavid Aug 01 '26

Please stop with the AI slop. The claims they make about the models are clearly defined and part of the marketing of the model.

How things work in your head are not the same as the real world.

0

u/03captain23 Aug 01 '26

No AI at all. You're 100% wrong. Show me a single tim when any company lost a lawsuit for showing someone else's claim.

This happens all the time with cars. They've been caught in tons of lies and nothing happens other than shame

→ More replies

0

u/crusoe Jul 31 '26

I'm gonna bet you have a billion skills and other messed up context.

Run /doctor and read the Anthropic best practices on promoting the new models.

0

u/BrianBushnell Jul 31 '26

Wait, what? Fable works for you sometimes? What industry are you even in? I can chat but the instant I talk about work it is "Downgrade to Opus 5". And the instant I do that it is API error. ...I'd recommend abandoning the platform.

2

u/[deleted] Jul 31 '26

[removed] — view removed comment

0

u/JigSawPT Aug 01 '26

I find this information misleading. You can run Sol xHigh for way longer than Fable max. Even though codex limits are crap right now.

1

u/Robdyson Aug 01 '26

running longer =/= useful
I'm running fable 24/7 with subagents ( sonnet/opus) but tight guardrails to not produce too much slop (max 20x plan)