# Claude Fable 5.2 raises Anthropic's FrontierCode score to 49.1% and cuts API prices by 20%

Mythos 5.2 uses the same underlying model with fewer cybersecurity and biology safeguards. It scores 89.6% on CVE rediscovery and is available only to verified organizations.

- Published: 2026-11-12T06:18:53.763Z
- Canonical: https://polylog.news/ai/2026-11-12/claude-fable-5-2-raises-anthropic-s-frontiercode-score-to-49
- Publisher: Polylog (AI desk)
- Section: tech
- Sources: [Anthropic News](https://www.anthropic.com/claude-fable-and-mythos-5-2), [DataCamp](https://www.datacamp.com/blog/claude-fable-5-2-and-mythos-5-2), [Officechai](https://officechai.com/ai/fable-5-2-benchmarks/), [Implicator](https://www.implicator.ai/anthropic-fable-5-2-mythos-5-2-price-cut/)

Anthropic [released Claude Fable 5.2 and Claude Mythos 5.2](https://www.anthropic.com/claude-fable-and-mythos-5-2) on November 9. The two products share one underlying model. Mythos ships with fewer cybersecurity and biology safeguards and is offered only through Anthropic's Life Sciences and Cyber Verification programs, [Implicator reported](https://www.implicator.ai/anthropic-fable-5-2-mythos-5-2-price-cut/). Fable 5.2 costs $8 per million input tokens and $40 per million output tokens, 20% below the $10 and $50 that Fable 5.1 charged. Anthropic says output is up to 30% faster, [SD Times reported](https://sdtimes.com/ai/anthropic-introduces-claude-fable-5-2-mythos-5-2/).

The headline numbers come from Anthropic's launch tables, as reproduced by [DataCamp](https://www.datacamp.com/blog/claude-fable-5-2-and-mythos-5-2) and [Kiledjian](https://kiledjian.com/2026/11/10/claude-fable-and-mythos-progress.html). On FrontierCode 2.0, Fable 5.2 scores 49.1%, up from 32.4% for Fable 5.1 and above 45.5% for Claude Opus 5.5. Anthropic says Fable 5.2 at High effort roughly matches Opus 5.5 at Max effort for about half the cost per task. Mythos 5.2 reaches 89.6% on CVE (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) Rediscovery, up from 78.3% for Mythos 5.1. [Officechai](https://officechai.com/ai/fable-5-2-benchmarks/) reports 76.3% on CyScenarioBench and 85.1% on a protein-binder design task.

The vendor tables also show results where Fable 5.2 does not lead. Gemini 4 Carbon beats it on AutomationBench, 53.9% to 51.4%. Opus 5.5 edges it on the Elo-rated AA-Briefcase, 1800 to 1785. On Terminal-Bench-Science, Fable 5.2 scores 74.6% and Mythos 5.2 scores 75.3%.

The one widely cited independent number comes from Artificial Analysis, which ranks Fable 5.2 first on its Intelligence Index with a score of 65. The same testing puts the cost of maximum effort at about $26.54 and 46.4 minutes per task. The cut in list price per token is therefore partly offset by heavy token use at high effort settings. Platform availability beyond the Claude API and Claude Platform on AWS was not confirmed in the announcement, [ExplainX noted](https://explainx.ai/blog/claude-fable-5-2-mythos-5-2-launch-pricing-api-2026). Both models keep a 30-day retention requirement and are excluded from zero data retention unless Anthropic authorizes it.

## What this means

Two things are happening at once. A coding gain of nearly 17 points on Anthropic's own benchmark keeps pressure on OpenAI and Google, whose GPT-6 Astra and Gemini 4 Carbon trail on most of the vendor's tables. A 20% price cut released a week before the IPO also shows Anthropic prioritizing token volume over margin. Until the system card's harness settings are checked, the FrontierCode jump should be treated as a vendor result. The single independent index agrees on the ranking but shows that the effective cost per task is high. The split between Fable and Mythos is the more durable change. Anthropic now sells the same model at two safeguard levels and restricts access to the less restricted version behind identity verification. That is a template for releasing capability with tiered access, and it connects to today's regional-policy story. The likelier outcome is that OpenAI and Google respond with price moves on their top coding tiers within weeks rather than with a new model. This depends on Fable 5.2 holding its lead in independent coding evaluations such as SWE-bench reruns. If those evaluations show the gain shrinking under neutral harnesses, the pressure to cut prices falls.

## What to watch

- Independent reruns of FrontierCode-style and SWE-bench tasks on neutral harnesses. They decide whether the 16.7-point gain is a capability change or a quirk of evaluation setup.
- Price moves on OpenAI's and Google's top coding tiers. A matching cut would confirm the price war has reached frontier coding models.
- Uptake of the Mythos verification programs by security firms. Broad enrollment would show that capability gated by identity checks can sell commercially.