text model comparison
Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder
Claude Opus 5 and Muse Wonder are both current text models, from Anthropic and Meta. Muse Wonder is 20% cheaper per 1M input tokens than Claude Opus 5, $4 vs $5. On Arena Text, Claude Opus 5 scores 1492 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 1492 Elo
- Lower price per 1M input tokens
- Muse Wonder$4 against $5
- Longer context window
- Muse Wonder1.05M tokens against 1M tokens
- Newer release
- Muse WonderOct 2026 against Jul 2026
Data verified November 3, 2026 · Dataset 2026-11-03
Side by side
Claude Opus 5 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.
| Fact | Claude Opus 5 | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|
| Price | ||
| Price per 1M input tokens | $5 | $4 (better) |
| Price per 1M output tokens | $25 | $20 (better) |
| Independent benchmarks | ||
| Arena Text | 1492 Elo (#8 of 51) | 1507 Elo (#3 of 51) (better) |
| Arena WebDev | 1691 Elo (#7 of 45) (better) | 1652 Elo (#15 of 45) |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) | 85.6% (#12 of 42) (better) | 82.1% (#14 of 42) |
| GPQA Diamond | 93.9% (#11 of 41) | Not measured |
| SimpleQA Verified | 59.9% (#14 of 38) | Not measured |
| Specs | ||
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Release date | July 24, 2026 | October 12, 2026 |
| Access | API only | API only |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Max output | 128,000 tokens | Not reported |
| Input | text, image | text, image, audio, video |
| Output | text | text |
Charts
Against every current text model
Where Claude Opus 5 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, Claude Opus 5 ranks #8 and Muse Wonder #3 of 51 current models. Each bar is the share of current models it beats: on score, price and context.
Independent benchmarks
Arena Text
Claude Opus 5:#8of 51
1,492 Elo · ahead of 86%
Muse Wonder:#3of 51
1,507 Elo · ahead of 96%
Arena WebDev
Claude Opus 5:#7of 45
1,691 Elo · ahead of 86%
Muse Wonder:#15of 45
1,652 Elo · ahead of 68%
FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)
Claude Opus 5:#12of 42
85.6% · ahead of 73%
Muse Wonder:#14of 42
82.1% · ahead of 66%
GPQA Diamond
Claude Opus 5:#11of 41
93.9% · ahead of 75%
Muse Wonder: Not scored
SimpleQA Verified
Claude Opus 5:#14of 38
59.9% · ahead of 65%
Muse Wonder: Not scored
Price and context
Price per 1M input tokens
Claude Opus 5:#46of 52
$5 · cheaper than 8%
Muse Wonder:#43of 52
$4 · cheaper than 14%
Price per 1M output tokens
Claude Opus 5:#46of 52
$25 · cheaper than 10%
Muse Wonder:#43of 52
$20 · cheaper than 14%
Context window
Claude Opus 5:#26of 64
1M tokens · longer than 22%
Muse Wonder:#11of 64
1.05M tokens · longer than 67%
Quality against price
Claude Opus 5 scores 1,492 at $10; 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 price: the data
| Model | Provider | Blended price per 1M tokens | Arena Text (Elo) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Gemini 4 Argon | $4 | 1,520 | |
| Claude Opus 5.5 | Anthropic | $8 | 1,509 |
| Muse Wonder | Meta | $8 | 1,507 |
| Claude Fable 5 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Claude Fable 5.1 | Anthropic | $20 | 1,504 |
| Gemini 3.8 Flash | $1.50 | 1,496 | |
| Muse Spark 1.3 | Meta | $2 | 1,495 |
| Claude Opus 5 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,492 |
| Kimi K3 | Moonshot Kimi | $6 | 1,488 |
| GPT-5.6 Sol | OpenAI | $8 | 1,485 |
| Gemini 3.6 Flash | $3 | 1,483 | |
| GPT-5.5 | OpenAI | $11 | 1,482 |
| Claude Opus 4.8 | Anthropic | $10 | 1,482 |
| Qwen3.8-Max | Alibaba Qwen | $3 | 1,482 |
| GPT-6.1 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,481 |
| GLM-5.3 | Z.ai | $2.15 | 1,481 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.54 | 1,480 |
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,477 |
| GLM-5.3-Flash | Z.ai | $0.24 | 1,477 |
| GPT-6 Astra | OpenAI | $20 | 1,476 |
| DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash | DeepSeek | $0.52 | 1,476 |
| GPT-5.4 | OpenAI | $5.63 | 1,475 |
| Gemini 3 Flash Preview | $1.13 | 1,473 | |
| Grok 4.20 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,472 |
| GPT-5.6 Terra | OpenAI | $4.50 | 1,467 |
| Grok 4.5 | xAI | $3 | 1,465 |
| DeepSeek-V4-Pro | DeepSeek | $1.98 | 1,465 |
| Claude Sonnet 5 | Anthropic | $4 | 1,462 |
| GPT-6 Sol | OpenAI | $4 | 1,458 |
| Gemini 3.5 Flash-Lite | $0.85 | 1,456 | |
| Grok 4.6 | xAI | $3 | 1,455 |
| GPT-5.6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.45 | 1,453 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Flash | Xiaomi MiMo | $0.18 | 1,448 |
| Step 5 Preview | StepFun | $1.43 | 1,448 |
| Grok 4.3 | xAI | $1.56 | 1,442 |
| GPT-6 Luna | OpenAI | $0.20 | 1,441 |
| Grok 4.7 | xAI | $3 | 1,441 |
| Mistral Large 4 | Mistral AI | $1.05 | 1,432 |
| Claude Haiku 5.5 | Anthropic | $0.20 | 1,425 |
| GPT-4.1 | OpenAI | $3.50 | 1,415 |
| Solar Pro 4 | Upstage | $0.52 | 1,388 |
| GPT-4.1 mini | OpenAI | $0.70 | 1,383 |
| GPT-4.1 nano | OpenAI | $0.18 | 1,322 |
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.
The same work, priced
For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5 costs 1.3 times as much as Muse Wonder, at each provider's listed rates.
10M input and 2M output tokens
Claude Opus 5 costs 1.3× as much
- Claude Opus 5
- $100
- Muse Wonder
- $80
The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached
Claude Opus 5 costs 1.3× as much
- Claude Opus 5
- $59.50
- Muse Wonder
- $45.80
| Workload or rate | Claude Opus 5 | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|
| Example workloads | ||
| 10M input and 2M output tokens | $100 | $80 (better) |
| The same, with 9M of the input tokens cached | $59.50 | $45.80 (better) |
| The same, through the batch API | $50 | Not listed |
| Other listed rates | ||
| 1M input tokens, cached | $0.50 | $0.20 (better) |
| 1M input tokens, batch | $2.50 | Not listed |
| 1M output tokens, batch | $12.50 | Not listed |
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
Verdict
When to choose each
Claude Opus 5
Where it leads
- Higher Arena WebDev score, 1691 Elo vs 1652 Elo
- Higher FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2) score, 85.6% vs 82.1%
- Batch pricing, $2.50 input and $12.50 output per 1M tokens
Best for
- Complex agentic coding and enterprise work as the general-purpose default before reaching for Fable 5.1
- Latency-sensitive work that can justify Fast mode pricing
Watch out for
- Fast mode pricing applies to the whole request, including above 200K input tokens, so it doubles the effective rate rather than adding a surcharge
- Cache reads are $0.50 per million (the standard 0.1x), five times Fable 5.1’s $0.25, even though Opus 5 is the cheaper model on base tokens. A cache-heavy agent loop can invert the expected cost ordering between the two.
Muse Wonder
Where it leads
- Lower input and output prices, $4 and $20 vs $5 and $25 per 1M tokens
- Higher Arena Text score, 1507 Elo vs 1492 Elo
- Accepts audio and video input
- Cheaper cached input, $0.20 vs $0.50 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
From benchmark to production
Building on Claude Opus 5 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
FAQ
Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder FAQ
Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 5 or Muse Wonder?
Muse Wonder is 20% cheaper per 1M input tokens than Claude Opus 5, $4 vs $5. For 10M input and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5 costs $100 and Muse Wonder $80 at standard rates.
Which is cheaper with prompt caching, Claude Opus 5 or Muse Wonder?
Claude Opus 5 charges $0.50 per 1M cached input tokens, 90% below its standard input rate, and Muse Wonder $0.20, 95% below. With 9M of 10M input tokens cached and 2M output tokens, Claude Opus 5 costs $59.50 and Muse Wonder $45.80.
Which scores higher on independent benchmarks, Claude Opus 5 or Muse Wonder?
Muse Wonder leads on Arena Text, 1507 Elo to 1492 Elo; Claude Opus 5 leads on Arena WebDev, 1691 Elo to 1652 Elo; Claude Opus 5 leads on FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2), 85.6% to 82.1%. Scores are independent evaluations, not either vendor's launch figures.
Which has the larger context window, Claude Opus 5 or Muse Wonder?
Both accept about 1.05M tokens of context (1,048,576 and 1,000,000).
How do Claude Opus 5 and Muse Wonder differ in features?
Claude Opus 5 takes text and image input; Muse Wonder takes text, image, audio and video.
Further reading
More on Claude Opus 5 and Muse Wonder
Articles on Claude Opus 5 and Muse Wonder
- Muse Wonder: Meta's Frontier Model, Benchmarks and PriceOctober 13, 2026
- Fable 5.1 vs Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6: Which to UseSeptember 1, 2026
- Kimi K3 vs Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Sol: which model should you use?July 31, 2026
- Gemini 3.6 Flash vs Claude Opus 5: Route by TierJuly 26, 2026
- Claude Opus 5: What Anthropic's New Flagship Means for AI AgentsJuly 26, 2026
Related comparisons
- Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Wonder
- Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Claude Opus 5.5 vs Muse Wonder
- Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Opus 5
- Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Wonder
- Claude Opus 4.8 vs Claude Opus 5
- Beam 1.0 vs Muse Wonder
- Claude Opus 5 vs Gemini 3.6 Flash
- Muse Spark Open vs Muse Wonder
- Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K3
- Muse Wonder vs Nemotron 3.5 Super VL
Production evaluation
Choosing between Claude Opus 5 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