Muse Wonder vs Claude Opus 5.5
Too close to call on our weighted score (Claude Opus 5.5 69, Muse Wonder 68). The right pick depends on what you value most.
MetaMuse Wonder
68/100- ECI161.7
- Price$4.00 / $20.00
- Context1.05M
AnthropicClaude Opus 5.5
69/100- ECI168.4
- Price$4.00 / $20.00
- Context1M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Claude Opus 5.5 69/100, Muse Wonder 68/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Opus 5.5 for raw capability, Muse Wonder on price and Muse Wonder for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityClaude Opus 5.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Opus 5.5 168.4 · Muse Wonder 161.7
- Lowest priceSame priceMuse Wonder $8.00 · Claude Opus 5.5 $8.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMuse WonderMuse Wonder 1,048,576 · Claude Opus 5.5 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsMuse WonderMuse Wonder: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Claude Opus 5.5: Text, Images, PDFs
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Muse Wonder | Claude Opus 5.5 |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 91 | 99 |
| Price | 25% | 7 | 7 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 100 | 80 |
| Context window | 10% | 61 | 60 |
| Overall | 100% | 68/100 | 69/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Muse WonderMeta | Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 161.7 | 168.4 (best) |
| ECI rank | #13 of 165 | #2 of 165 (best) |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 90.6% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 82.1% | 91.2% (best) |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 99.4% | 100% (best) |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 72.2% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $4.00 | $4.00 |
| Output | $20.00 | $20.00 |
| Cached input | $0.20 | $0.20 |
| Blended (3:1) | $8.00 | $8.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Meta API | Official Anthropic API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Max output | 131,072 tokens (best) | 128,000 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | Yes |
| Audio | Yes | No |
| Video | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | muse-wonder-1.0 | claude-opus-5-5 |
| API providers | 9 | 36 (best) |
| Released | Oct 12, 2026 | Sep 22, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jun 2026 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Muse Wonder$80.00
- Claude Opus 5.5$80.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Muse Wonder or Claude Opus 5.5?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within 1 points (Claude Opus 5.5 69/100, Muse Wonder 68/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Claude Opus 5.5 for raw capability, Muse Wonder on price and Muse Wonder for long inputs. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Muse Wonder or Claude Opus 5.5?
Muse Wonder and Claude Opus 5.5 cost the same: $4.00 input / $20.00 output per million tokens.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Opus 5.5 168.4 (#2 of 165) and Muse Wonder 161.7 (#13 of 165). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (165.4–173.0 vs 159.2–164.6), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Claude Opus 5.5 91.2%, Muse Wonder 82.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Opus 5.5 100%, Muse Wonder 99.4%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Muse Wonder and Claude Opus 5.5 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Opus 5.5 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Wonder has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Claude Opus 5.5. Maximum output per response: Muse Wonder up to 131,072, Claude Opus 5.5 up to 128,000 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Muse Wonder accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Claude Opus 5.5 accepts text, images and PDFs. Muse Wonder handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Muse Wonder and Claude Opus 5.5 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Muse Wonder is the newest, released Oct 12, 2026. Claude Opus 5.5 came out Sep 22, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Opus 5.5 Jun 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add GPT-5.6 SolThree-way comparison
- Muse Wonder vs GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI · ECI 162.6
- Muse Wonder vs Claude Opus 5Anthropic · ECI 164.5
- Muse Wonder vs Kimi K3Moonshot AI · ECI 158.3
- Muse Wonder vs Gemini 4 ArgonGoogle · ECI 166.1
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI · ECI 167.8
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Gemini 4 ArgonGoogle · ECI 166.1
