AI/ML API 用同样的提示词对 Anthropic 的 Fable 5.1 和 OpenAI 的 GPT-5.6 Sol 做了一次成型的 Three.js 测试，5 个独立场景组成私岛豪宅项目。
Fable 5.1's cost gap is still huge.
On AI/ML API's (@aimlapi) 1-shot Three.js test, Fable 5.1 cost $5.69 versus $0.88 for GPT-5.6 Sol.
Fable spent that extra budget on scene density: waves, shoreline depth, thousands of chandelier crystals, a much larger water-park structure, smoother helicopter motion.
Sol produced less detail, but kept the same low-poly visual language across all 5 independently generated scenes.
And both still made basic state mistakes. Fable rendered the pool without water. Sol simplified some scenes enough that important geometry disappeared.
This is a nice example of why "better coding model" gets fuzzy once the output is a whole visual system.
You are trading off object count, physical plausibility, cross-scene consistency, instruction coverage, and inference cost at the same time.
you can try Fable 5.1 on aimlapi[.]com
Fable 5.1 charges 6× more than GPT-5.6 Sol anthropic's Fable 5.1 went live. we threw it straight at openai's GPT-5.6 Sol. same prompts, one shot. the test: five self-contained three.js scenes, one continuous project — a futuristic mansion on a private island. exterior orbit, grand hall with a diamond chandelier, pool with a water park, garage with 10 lambos, helicopter landing on the roof cost: Claude Fable 5.1 — $5.69 GPT-5.6 Sol — $0.88 what we saw: • fable goes for realism — waves, depth, a sand ring around the island. sol goes low-poly and clean, and its style never breaks across all 5 scenes • fable's chandelier is thousands of individual crystals. sol's hall is honestly just a staircase and a wall • fable's helicopter touches down on the lit helipad much smoother than sol's • fable built a triple-slide water-park tower — and shipped the pool with no water. sol's park is tiny — but the pool is full 6× the price buys you 6× the detail — and the same one-shot bugs. what's your choice? try Fable 5.1 on aimlapi[.]com在 X 查看被引用的帖子
来源：Rohan Paul · x.com