3 ms·

Mythos/Fable are around 10T: > According to FT, industry estimates say Anthropic's most advanced Mythos 5 has about 8 trillion parameters and Fable 5 about 5

by nl 2mo ago

Mythos/Fable are around 10T: > According to FT, industry estimates say Anthropic's most advanced Mythos 5 has about 8 trillion parameters and Fable 5 about 5 trillion https://www.reuters.com/technology/bytedance-targets-mega-ai-model-nearing-anthropics-mythos-ft-reports-2026-08-07/ https://www.reuters.com/technology/bytedance-targets-mega-ai... I believe this report has confused Opus (which is known to be around 5T) and Fable. Other reports say 10T. See for example https://eu.36kr.com/en/p/3760679047267075?ref=explainx https://eu.36kr.com/en/p/3760679047267075?ref=explainx where Musk talks about the models being trained on Colossus2

zozbot234 2mo ago
> I believe this report has confused Opus (which is known to be around 5T) and Fable. 5T for Opus feels quite high though. DeepSeek V4 Pro is a mere 1.6T and often described as a match with Opus in overall quality. Even the largest open models in common use are around 2.8T.
- Implicated 2mo ago
  > and often described as a match with Opus in overall quality It's not. Idk about who has more T's but, unfortunately, DS4 pro is not a match to Opus, at least not Opus 4.8.
- nl 2mo ago
  It's not an Opus match. The difference is very visible in long tail applications. Exactly where you'd expect parameter count to matter.
YmiYugy 2mo ago
I'm confused. I thought Mythos 5 and Fable 5 were exactly the same model just with a different security layer in front of it. Could they mean the Mythos 5 Preview?
- nl 2mo ago
  Yes. One reason why I think that report has confused Fable and Opus.