Skip to main content
Van Data Team

text model comparison

Beam 1.0 vs Muse Wonder

Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder are both current text models, from Reflection AI and Meta. On Arena Text, Beam 1.0 scores 1436 Elo and Muse Wonder 1507 Elo (Arena, measured October 28, 2026). Both accept about 1.05M tokens of context (1,048,576 and 1,000,000).

Higher Arena Text
Muse Wonder1507 Elo against 1436 Elo
Longer context window
Muse Wonder1.05M tokens against 1M tokens
Newer release
Beam 1.0Oct 2026 against Oct 2026

Data verified November 3, 2026 · Dataset 2026-11-03

Share this

Side by side

Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder, line by line

Prices in effect today, compared at the same tier wherever both list one. The better value in each row is highlighted.

FactBeam 1.0Muse Wonder
Price
Price per 1M input tokensNot listed$4
Price per 1M output tokensNot listed$20
Independent benchmarks
Arena Text1436 Elo (#39 of 51)1507 Elo (#3 of 51) (better)
Arena WebDev1436 Elo (#38 of 45)1652 Elo (#15 of 45) (better)
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)Not measured82.1% (#14 of 42)
Specs
ProviderReflection AIMeta
Release dateOctober 16, 2026October 12, 2026
AccessAPI and open weightsAPI only
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens
Max outputNot reportedNot reported
Inputtexttext, image, audio, video
Outputtexttext

Scores:Arena · 2026-11-03Epoch AI · 2026-11-03

Open both in the interactive comparison

Charts

Against every current text model

Where Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder land among the current models of their task, on every independent benchmark, on price and on context.

Where each stands

On Arena Text, Beam 1.0 ranks #39 and Muse Wonder #3 of 51 current models. Each bar is the share of current models it beats: on score, price and context.

Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder among the current text models, one row per benchmark, price and context window.

Independent benchmarks

Arena Text

Beam 1.0:#39of 51

1,436 Elo · ahead of 24%

Muse Wonder:#3of 51

1,507 Elo · ahead of 96%

Arena WebDev

Beam 1.0:#38of 45

1,436 Elo · ahead of 16%

Muse Wonder:#15of 45

1,652 Elo · ahead of 68%

FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)

Beam 1.0: Not scored

Muse Wonder:#14of 42

82.1% · ahead of 66%

Price and context

Price per 1M input tokens

Beam 1.0: Not listed

Muse Wonder:#43of 52

$4 · cheaper than 14%

Price per 1M output tokens

Beam 1.0: Not listed

Muse Wonder:#43of 52

$20 · cheaper than 14%

Context window

Beam 1.0:#26of 64

1M tokens · longer than 22%

Muse Wonder:#11of 64

1.05M tokens · longer than 67%

Scores fromArena · 2026-11-03Epoch AI · 2026-11-03

Quality against price

Arena Text · measured October 28, 2026

Muse Wonder scores 1,507 at $8 (blended price per 1M tokens). The line joins the current models no other beats on both price and Arena Text score; hover any point to name it.

Quality against priceArena Text score against price for 43 text models, Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder marked.1,2501,3001,3501,4001,4501,5001,550$0.30$1$3$10MOST ATTRACTIVE QUADRANTMedian price $3Median 1,475Blended price per 1M tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scaleArena Text (Elo)Muse Wonder
Quality against price: the data
Arena Text score against price for 43 text models, Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder marked.
ModelProviderBlended price per 1M tokensArena Text (Elo)
Gemini 4 ArgonGoogle$41,520
Claude Opus 5.5Anthropic$81,509
Muse WonderMeta$81,507
Claude Fable 5Anthropic$201,504
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic$201,504
Gemini 3.8 FlashGoogle$1.501,496
Muse Spark 1.3Meta$21,495
Claude Opus 5Anthropic$101,492
Kimi K3Moonshot Kimi$61,488
GPT-5.6 SolOpenAI$81,485
Gemini 3.6 FlashGoogle$31,483
GPT-5.5OpenAI$111,482
Claude Opus 4.8Anthropic$101,482
Qwen3.8-MaxAlibaba Qwen$31,482
GPT-6.1 SolOpenAI$41,481
GLM-5.3Z.ai$2.151,481
MiMo-V2.6-ProXiaomi MiMo$0.541,480
Claude Sonnet 5.5Anthropic$41,477
GLM-5.3-FlashZ.ai$0.241,477
GPT-6 AstraOpenAI$201,476
DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek$0.521,476
GPT-5.4OpenAI$5.631,475
Gemini 3 Flash PreviewGoogle$1.131,473
Grok 4.20xAI$1.561,472
GPT-5.6 TerraOpenAI$4.501,467
Grok 4.5xAI$31,465
DeepSeek-V4-ProDeepSeek$1.981,465
Claude Sonnet 5Anthropic$41,462
GPT-6 SolOpenAI$41,458
Gemini 3.5 Flash-LiteGoogle$0.851,456
Grok 4.6xAI$31,455
GPT-5.6 LunaOpenAI$0.451,453
MiMo-V2.6-FlashXiaomi MiMo$0.181,448
Step 5 PreviewStepFun$1.431,448
Grok 4.3xAI$1.561,442
GPT-6 LunaOpenAI$0.201,441
Grok 4.7xAI$31,441
Mistral Large 4Mistral AI$1.051,432
Claude Haiku 5.5Anthropic$0.201,425
GPT-4.1OpenAI$3.501,415
Solar Pro 4Upstage$0.521,388
GPT-4.1 miniOpenAI$0.701,383
GPT-4.1 nanoOpenAI$0.181,322

Cost

What each costs

Example workloads at each provider's listed rates, then every other rate either one lists. The cheaper figure in each row is highlighted.

Workload or rateBeam 1.0Muse Wonder
Other listed rates
1M input tokens, cachedNot listed$0.20

Your own bill will differ. These figures use list prices and example workloads. The AI Model Cost Audit reviews your real usage, shortlists models that score as well for each task for less, and estimates the savings.

Launch price $100, regular price $150

Book the cost audit

Verdict

When to choose each

Beam 1.0

Where it leads

  • Open weights you can run yourself

Best for

  • Self-hosted coding agents under a permissive licence
  • Fine-tuning or distilling a large open model

Watch out for

  • Reflection API is a public beta that is free to start, with no published per-token price
  • Text only, with no image, audio or video input
Full Beam 1.0 profile

Muse Wonder

Where it leads

  • Higher Arena Text score, 1507 Elo vs 1436 Elo
  • Higher Arena WebDev score, 1652 Elo vs 1436 Elo
  • Accepts image, audio and video input
  • A cached-input rate, $0.20 per 1M tokens

Best for

  • Multi-file coding changes and multi-hour agent runs
  • Sub-agent orchestration where capability matters more than cost

Watch out for

  • Meta lists it as a preview, and the Model API serves Standard mode only, with no discounted Contributor tier
  • The higher-capability Muse Wonder Full is only available through Muse Code subscriptions, not per token
Full Muse Wonder profile

From benchmark to production

Building on Beam 1.0 or Muse Wonder?

Public scores rarely hold on your own data. We test both models on your real tasks, then build the agent or pipeline around the one that wins.

AI Model Cost AuditLaunch price $100, regular price $150What the audit includes

Book the cost auditAI agent development

FAQ

Beam 1.0 vs Muse Wonder FAQ

Do Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder discount cached input?

Muse Wonder lists a cached-input rate of $0.20 per 1M tokens, 95% below its standard input rate. No cached-input rate is listed for Beam 1.0.

Which scores higher on independent benchmarks, Beam 1.0 or Muse Wonder?

Muse Wonder leads on Arena Text, 1507 Elo to 1436 Elo; Muse Wonder leads on Arena WebDev, 1652 Elo to 1436 Elo. Scores are independent evaluations, not either vendor's launch figures.

Which has the larger context window, Beam 1.0 or Muse Wonder?

Both accept about 1.05M tokens of context (1,048,576 and 1,000,000).

How do Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder differ in features?

Beam 1.0 takes text input; Muse Wonder takes text, image, audio and video.

Can I run Beam 1.0 or Muse Wonder myself?

Beam 1.0 is released as open weights you can run yourself; Muse Wonder is available through its provider's API only.

Further reading

More on Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder

Articles on Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder

Related comparisons

Production evaluation

Choosing between Beam 1.0 and Muse Wonder?

Public benchmarks narrow the shortlist. We run both on your own tasks, data and cost limits, then build the routing and review controls to run the winner in production.

  • A head-to-head evaluation on your real workload
  • Routing between models by cost and difficulty
Compare all modelsBook a consultation