Fable 5.1's science benchmark score more than doubles

Fable 5.1's score on Terminal-Bench-Science more than doubled to 52.6%, according to Zvi's September 5 review of the model's benchmark results.

The jump matters for teams weighing whether the upgrade is worth a migration. Terminal-Bench-Science tests real terminal-task completion, not toy problems, and the model now clears it at more than double its earlier rate.

Other evals moved too. CursorBench 3.2 reached 73.4%, up from 70.5%. OSWorld 2.0 scored 78% on partial credit and 42% on the stricter pass, and HLE reached 60.9%.

Cache-read pricing dropped 75%, to $0.25 per million tokens, covering the reused context that agentic sessions rely on.

Safety-classifier false positives fell about 60%, meaning fewer benign actions get flagged mid-task.

Separate reports put Fable 5.1's token consumption at about 3x its predecessor per task, a cost that could offset the cheaper cache rate for high-volume workloads. Zvi's review doesn't reconcile that figure against the price cut for real-world usage.