SyncAI.news, a Varaisys broadcasting
Anthropic's Fable 5.2 completes 41 percent of real freelance jobs, up from 2.5 percent a year ago
MS

Maximilian Schreiner

· 1 min read

BusinessThe Decoder

Anthropic's Fable 5.2 completes 41 percent of real freelance jobs, up from 2.5 percent a year ago

The progress shows how fast AI agents are catching up on practical work. When the benchmark launched about a year ago, the top system at the time, Manus, managed just 2.5 percent of tasks. Fable 5.2 now completes more than 16 times as many professional jobs.

The jump is also large compared to the most recent measurements. In July, Fable 5, an older model from the same family, was still in front at about 16 percent. That score was already a big step forward: the best agents had more than quadrupled the share of jobs they completed at professional quality within eight months. Four months later, Fable 5.2 hits 41.3 percent. That's roughly two and a half times Fable 5's July score. Its direct predecessor, Fable 5.1, also trails far behind at just under 18 percent, and Fable 5.2 completes more than twice as many jobs.

The next spots on the current leaderboard go to Anthropic's Opus 5.5 at 21.25 percent and OpenAI's GPT 6 Astra at 20.83 percent. Fable 5.2 works almost twice as successfully as the next-best systems on the market. Google's strongest model in the test, Gemini Argon 4, lands in fifth place at 17.08 percent, while older models like GPT-5.2 or Gemini 3 Pro sit below three percent.

Fable 5.2 breaks through in 3D models, audio, and architecture

Scale Labs said on X that Fable 5.2 makes its biggest gains in editing audio and music, designing architecture and interior spaces, and creating 3D models. The agent also handles long, complex projects that previously top-ranked models regularly failed.

Nearly 50 of Fable 5.2's successful completions were jobs no AI agent in the test had solved before. Scale Labs says the AI can still barely handle other tasks, especially industrial product design and animations. When AI agents fail in the test, they typically deliver amateur-quality work, incomplete results, broken files, or contradictory designs, according to the researchers.

Original source

This story was published by The Decoder and written by Maximilian Schreiner. SyncAI.news shows a preview; the complete article is on the publisher's site.

Read the full story on the-decoder.com

Similar News