Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder
Claude Sonnet 5.5 comes out ahead, 72 to 68 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.
- Our pick
Anthropic
Claude Sonnet 5.5
72/100- ECI166.7
- Price$2.00 / $10.00
- Context1M
Meta
Muse Wonder
68/100- ECI161.7
- Price$4.00 / $20.00
- Context1.05M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is our pick
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Muse Wonder (68). It leads on capability and price. Muse Wonder wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityClaude Sonnet 5.5Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Sonnet 5.5 166.7 · Muse Wonder 161.7
- Lowest priceClaude Sonnet 5.5Claude Sonnet 5.5 $4.00 · Muse Wonder $8.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMuse WonderMuse Wonder 1,048,576 · Claude Sonnet 5.5 1,000,000 tokens
- Widest inputsMuse WonderClaude Sonnet 5.5: Text, Images, PDFs · Muse Wonder: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
| Measure | Weight | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 97 | 91 |
| Price | 25% | 20 | 7 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 80 | 100 |
| Context window | 10% | 60 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 72/100 | 68/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | ||
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 166.7 (best) | 161.7 |
| ECI rank | #5 of 165 (best) | #13 of 165 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | 95.6% | — |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | 88.8% (best) | 82.1% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | 100% (best) | 99.4% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | 46.5% | — |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | $2.00 (best) | $4.00 |
| Output | $10.00 (best) | $20.00 |
| Cached input | $0.10 (best) | $0.20 |
| Blended (3:1) | $4.00 (best) | $8.00 |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Official Anthropic API | Official Meta API |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | 131,072 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | Yes | Yes |
| Audio | No | Yes |
| Video | No | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | Yes | Yes |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| API model ID | claude-sonnet-5-5 | muse-wonder-1.0 |
| API providers | 34 (best) | 9 |
| Released | Sep 28, 2026 | Oct 12, 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.
Claude Sonnet 5.5$40.00
Muse Wonder$80.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Wonder?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the better all-round choice, scoring 72/100 against Muse Wonder (68). It leads on capability and price. Muse Wonder wins on inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Wonder?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is cheaper at $2.00 input / $10.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). Muse Wonder costs $4.00 input / $20.00 output per million tokens (official Meta API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $4.00 per million tokens for Claude Sonnet 5.5 versus $8.00 for Muse Wonder (2× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Sonnet 5.5 166.7 (#5 of 165) and Muse Wonder 161.7 (#13 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (163.6–171.3 vs 159.2–164.6), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Claude Sonnet 5.5 88.8%, Muse Wonder 82.1%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Sonnet 5.5 100%, Muse Wonder 99.4%.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Wonder yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Sonnet 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 Sonnet 5.5. Maximum output per response: Claude Sonnet 5.5 up to 128,000, Muse Wonder up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 accepts text, images and PDFs; Muse Wonder accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video. Muse Wonder handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
No. Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Wonder are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.
Which is newer?
Muse Wonder is the newest, released Oct 12, 2026. Claude Sonnet 5.5 came out Sep 28, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Sonnet 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.