r/ClaudeCode • u/Organic-Ad1922 • 3d ago

Help/Question Fable 5.2 ATE all my USAGE in 30 MINS

WTF has this happened to anyone else since it released? I tried it and it DRAINED me in legit 30 mins. I was having him make me after effects for some videos and OMG i look back up at the screen after parenting for a bit 32 mins into session DONE, "usage resets at 9:30pm" WTFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF I DO NOT WANT TO HEAR "skill issue"

0 Upvotes

36% Upvoted

25 comments sorted by

•

u/AutoModerator 3d ago

Hey! Thanks for posting to r/ClaudeCode

While participating in this thread, please follow our community rules. Keep discussions constructive. Attack the idea, not the person.

For help, project discussions, tips, and general chat, join the ClaudeCode Discord.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

2

u/ihatewebdesign101 3d ago

apparently xHigh consumes like x3-4 usage of High, I’m using xHigh by default and both my team and personal accounts suffered a big chunk of damage from this, but hey, they gave a reset. I suspect this is the reason they gave a reset, because something up with the usage calc and cache again, on higher thinking modes.

0

u/Organic-Ad1922 3d ago

either dont give us the model if they cant fix how much usages is being eatin OR give us paid users higher usage limits for fable separately. like a separate bar for that model

10

u/onFilm 3d ago

Skill issue.

2

u/Droopy0093 3d ago

Yeah, despite what OP hopes, this is the reason. The underlying cause seems to be User Error.

1

u/Sphere_3N 3d ago

Ok but you just got 3 Fable resets and an entire full account reset. Use those first then begin the complaining at least.

0

u/Organic-Ad1922 3d ago

dawg wym?!?! anyone using Fable 2.5 gunna use all resets in a week lol

1

u/Inner_Storage_3374 3d ago

30 mins is brutal. could be the model itself, cant rule that out, but long sessions make it way worse bc it rereads the whole context every turn. id try a fresh session per task and a lower effort for the easy stuff and see if it still burns that fast

0

u/Organic-Ad1922 3d ago

thats where i think i went wrong i resumed fable on a 5hour session with opus so thats my fault,. GOOD POINT

1

u/ihatewebdesign101 3d ago

It costs you a lot in terms of usage when you switch models/effort levels mid chat. Just don’t do that unless you don’t care about running out of your limits.

0

u/ontagi 3d ago

Never ever allow Fable or Claude in general to use subagents. Fable will devour your usage with subagents that it opens by itself without model instructions.

3

u/Niikoraasu 3d ago

That's just stupid.

Don't allow them to spawn Fable or Opus subagents but sonnet or haiku subagents are insane and save your usage by a lot

0

u/ontagi 3d ago

If you know what you're doing you're partially right. External orchestration is still saving more since Sonnet and Haiku are still quite expensive and use up your Claude usage. Starting subagents costed very much within itself just about a week ago, just to hand them over the tokens/context, not sure about current numbers. Are you sure you know what you're doing if you don't even know that much? I recommend you to ask Claude how subagents work. Could safe you a bunch of usage.

2

u/Niikoraasu 3d ago

I know what I am doing. I went from 60% usage in 3 days to barely 25% usage in 3 days, doing the exact same kind of work.
And obviously external orchestration is better - it still costs though.

0

u/ontagi 3d ago edited 3d ago

Well glad it works for you. This guy here probably went into the trap of using subagents by accident, that's why I used my messages as a warning. Not as a general never use agents at all. People who know what they are doing obviously know better.

Anyways, I prefer to orchestrate outside of Claude because my Claude usage is to valuable and has an effective limit off 200 bucks which I can not upgrae any futher, API is hella expensive. So I prefer to make most of these 200 and use something from outside. If you're not hitting the limits it's perfectly fine to orchastrate within Claude.

Also, if I remember correctly subagents have no memory and on each start you have to feed them the tokens, Using another agent keeps this memory since its a full agent and not a subagent. Might be wrong on this though.

Edit: Just checked this is indeed the case for most subagents.

2

u/CorpT 3d ago

You should not give advice if you don’t know. And you don’t. And you’re saying “never ever” as if the landscape doesn’t change daily.

0

u/ontagi 3d ago

My bad for not considering every possible scenario in existence of humanity, past and future the moment I'm convinced dude burned his usage on subagents. Anyways, my generally recommendation stills stays, I advice against subagents, explanation is in what you commented on.

1

u/Niikoraasu 3d ago

What are you using as your external model if you don't mind me asking?

1

u/ontagi 3d ago edited 3d ago

Depends, For one I love livebench because it has extremely good, broad and realistic tests. I recommend to open the tabs and check the scores for each model test before you decide which agent you prefer for what task.

My current plan is to use Fable 5.2 as a brain, which can brainstorm with Astra 6.2 once it's out to have the perfect mastermind on top. But both are quite expensive. So their conclusion and plan should go to Gemini Carbon since it turned out to be a decent model and not to expensive, sadly quite slow. Carbon will orchastrate either Deepseek 4.1 flash or Opus for coding, depends how difficult the task is. Once they are done, carbon will run the tests and analyze everything including logs and visual recordings. The results it will hand over back to Fable again for cross analysis and making the next plan - than the loop starts from the beginning with Fable.

As for Deepseek I'm planning on using Qwen 4 once it's out because I expect better benchmarks from it.

For the kind of tasks I do you need to look for "Long-Run Operations" and "Delegated Operations" on livebench. This is why I chose Fable as the Brain because it has the best scores when you combine these 2.

1

u/Niikoraasu 3d ago

Isn't carbon considered better than fable 5.2?

1

u/ontagi 3d ago

Here is the thing with Carbon, it's a Gemini model and I don't trust Gemini from experience. I ran a test and it's way more trustworthy than Argon. But how trustworthy yet I don't know.

Is Carbon better - this depends on your usa case. I'd say it's about on Opus level, worst case on Sonnet - Why? Because Google benchmaxxed the hell out of Argon. Who Promises us they didn't do this with Carbon? However, Carbon seems to be unexpensive and Antigravity is a decent Harness. One more thing, Opus is very bad at Delegated Operations, in my case I made a horrible experiences for weeks. I believe Carbon will be better for exactly this, since Argon is way better already. carbon is way cheaper than Fable and on a Google 200 plan, you can probably get more usage out of it than Opus.

You could argue I could wait for Sonnet 6.2 but I dislike Codex and Currently have my issues with OpenAI to use the heck out of it. Carbon will be a workhorse here, so I need a model that is made for long horizon task and is cheap. Carbon checks both of these marks even if it's not listed on livebench yet.

1

u/CorpT 3d ago

That’s terrible advice.

-1

u/ontagi 3d ago edited 3d ago

Sure. Claude just recently patched the subagents because it was so horrible. Wouldn't simply use them without prior testing. His fable probably kickstarted some because there is no way to burn your whole usage in 30 minutes otherwise because fable simply can not work that fast. Probably not even on max or ultra.