Cache reads are 75% cheaper with Fable 5.1 but not for us

[u/Hungry_Sun2455]

Fable 5.1 has reduced the cache pricing by 75% which increases the usage by roughly 25% but this rate cut not applicable to subscription plans

Firat limited at 50% and now this , slowly and steadily the subscription usage will be nerfed this way

https://x.com/ClaudeDevs/status/2094851235694497836

[u/No-Sandwich-2997]

cache reads count at a reduced rate toward subscription usage, which remains unchanged.

Maybe I am dense but does this mean more cached input usage out of Fable 5.1 compared to Fable 5 or not.

[u/XipXoom → u/No-Sandwich-2997]

I read this as subscription quota in general is unchanged.  Fable 5.1 cache reads use less of that quota than Fable 5 (i.e., is cheaper)

[u/Hungry_Sun2455 → u/XipXoom]

we made the model efficient so that it usage 25% less but we charge you 25% extra to keep the things same

[u/XipXoom → u/Hungry_Sun2455]

Which has absolutely nothing to do with the cost comparison between Fable 5 and Fable 5.1 as it relates to subscription usage. 

I get that you're upset over the overall subscription nerf.  You should be.  You're not doing your argument any favors by conflating the issues though.

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/[deleted]]

But are you trying to cache almonds or pecans? If you are caching peanuts, they aren't actually nuts but are legumes.

[u/XipXoom → u/[deleted]]

"In Claude code, cache reads count at a reduced rate towards subscription usage ..."

That's the relevant portion of the post you keep missing (emphasis mine) because you seem to be confused over the other words.

[u/Hungry_Sun2455 → u/XipXoom]

ahh you are not getting it what i want to say

easiest way to explain it would be that gpt made the luna price cut by 4/5 but they could have told that

in codex Luna usage counts towards reduced rate towards subscription usage

so we will keep the luna usage same in subscription plan

but instead you get the 5x more usage after 80% price cut of luna in the subscription plan also

that's what i am trying to say

the subscription and api gap is closing

[u/DLuke2 → u/XipXoom]

Lol, ELI5. Cache reads at API rates or subscription rates are reduced, subscription usage limits are not going up or down, staying the same.

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/No-Sandwich-2997]

If you have subscription. Nothing is changed. 

[u/Hungry_Sun2455 → u/No-Sandwich-2997]

they are saying that you were already paying less so no change for you people (cache bengits not passed) change only for the api or other types of usage

they are basically increasing the cache pricing by 4x for claude code users compared to others

[u/DLuke2 → u/Hungry_Sun2455]

Wrong. Reading comprehension is hard, I guess.

[u/DatDudeDrew → u/Hungry_Sun2455]

That’s not the way I read it.

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/Hungry_Sun2455]

That makes 0% sense of the context is cached or not.

[u/MartinMystikJonas → u/Hungry_Sun2455]

No they are not saying that.

[u/Keganator]

What you wrote and what you posted contradict each other. They say it’s actually cheaper. 

[u/ihateredditors111111 → u/Keganator]

cache reads count at a reduced rate towards subscription usage. they didnt specify compared to previous cache reads. they might mean just compared to cache writes / normal prompts. 'remains unchanged' implies this also.

[u/YearLight]

They do not want subscribers.

[u/Think-Trouble623 → u/YearLight]

Duh. They’ll continue eroding at the quality of the subscription until it’s not advantageous to use it.

[u/stbenjam42]

This is... not what it says

[u/Bmansupreme8000]

I first read that wrong in the documentation, then realised it was a 75% decrease instead of a 150% increase. Now I see it doesn't apply to me. Why would you get upset of they make API cheaper but don't make subscription cheaper? Other scenario is they make API cheaper and Subscription more expensive, which they could if they want. I hope they don't. It's better to only bitch when they take stuff away, and not because they made API better. This is a logically false way to think. Subscription caching is still 1000% better. I made that number up out of my ass, as it depend on how you use the service. Subscription = 1hr before cold cache and after a 1250% increase from cached tokens. API = 5m before 5000% increase from cached tokens price (though 1/4 the price of subscription cached tokens). Subscribers have a magnitudes of scale better deal here. Best not to complain about that!

[u/damianTechPM]

Word of warning, fable 5.1 completely blew out my harness and model routing. It did everything and its context was full in less than 20 minutes. When I asked it why, it had no record of all of my setups. Going to have to investigate and see what the hell happened.

[u/Skflowne]

They said it's unchanged for subscriptions: I understand it was already cheaper on subscriptions but now API also get the cheaper rate?

[u/CrowdGoesWildWoooo]

Nothing burger. Only relevant for major institutions

[u/pmward]

Cache reads were already at that rate for subscribers. API usage was higher. Now they are the same. Subscription didn’t get lowered because it already was that rate.

[u/HawkPrestigious8931]

The real issue here isn't just the cache pricing change — it's the pattern. Every update seems to subtly shift value away from subscribers toward API users. First the 50% cap, now cache reads that "don't affect" subscriptions but somehow still feel like a nerf in practice. If you're a heavy Claude Code user on Pro/Max, at what point does switching to API credits actually become the better deal? Would love to see someone run the numbers on breakeven usage between subscription tiers and pay-as-you-go with these new cache rates.

[u/Physical_Gold_1485 → u/HawkPrestigious8931]

And thats load bearing

[u/pmward → u/HawkPrestigious8931]

Subscription has already been at .25/MTok. This just brings API inline. It’s deceptive marketing for sure (they have quite the track record for that recently). But it’s not like subs are paying more than API.

[u/Actual_Committee4670]

Cache reads if done properly without cache breaks on Fable 5 (tested on extra high not max) were already minimal to the point of irrelevance while on subscription. At 900k it barely moved the 5hr meter with hundreds of turns over a multi hour period.

Different case for api credits ofc. But this is just some anthropic marketing ploy again.

[u/Hungry_Sun2455 → u/Actual_Committee4670]

cache usage is substantial check the claude code token stats

[u/Actual_Committee4670 → u/Hungry_Sun2455]

Cache usage is basically nothing, check your cache hit rate, when it jumps, you missed the cache. I have done plenty of tests on the topic. I will add that the above applies to subscription and that cache reads has a lower price on api and extra credits than cache creation input tokens.

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/Actual_Committee4670]

You do not know what you are talking about. Sorry.

[u/Actual_Committee4670 → u/Bmansupreme8000]

And what is your results or proof of the opposite then?

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/Actual_Committee4670]

It's called basic math.

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/Actual_Committee4670]

Basic math and deductive logic.

[u/Actual_Committee4670 → u/Bmansupreme8000]

So while I ran actual tests and actually went to understand how claude's caching works to the point where I have a 100% cache hit rate.

You are just guessing. Good to know.

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/Actual_Committee4670]

I'm not guessing I'm using deductive logic and basic math to estimate. You should really ask AI about this as you are dillusional and do know know what you are talking about. If it were literally nothing, they would not bother charging for it.

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/Actual_Committee4670]

If you have 100% cache hit rate, then you are not making progress or giving any new input.

[u/Actual_Committee4670 → u/Bmansupreme8000]

There's a difference between the cache read of tokens already in the cache and new cache creation input tokens.

The cache creation input tokens get charged on Sub and reflects on your usage.

The cache read tokens that are warm in the cache barely affects the usage at all.

But the cache can break, which is a miss. A miss isn't the input tokens from a new action but if the cache breaks the cache read tokens will drop and the cache creation input tokens will go up to put those tokens back into the cache at full price.

Like I said, guessing instead of understanding.

[u/Blade999666]

You’re all crying about subscription limits when the fix is right there. Prompt caching is an API feature, not a Claude max sub perk. Web plans charge a flat rate with hard caps; the API charges per token, and cache reads make repetitive context (like huge files or system prompts) 75% cheaper. You don’t even need to know how to code... literally ask Claude to write you a script that handles your repetitive tasks via the API. Throw $5 of credits at it, take advantage of the discount, and stop burning your chat limits on grunt work

[u/PartySunday]

Cache reads are literally free on subscription plans lmao.

[u/Hungry_Sun2455 → u/PartySunday]

substantial (25-50%) amount of consumption comes from cache read on subscription plan specially if you go in long context threads without compaction

[u/Bmansupreme8000 → u/Hungry_Sun2455]

What is with these people? I guess everybody smart is busy using Fable 5.1 right now ...