Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) vs Muse Wonder (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Muse Wonder (Max) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-11-10.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallbac… scores 18.2 points higher (61.8 vs 43.6) but costs 1.3× as much to run the benchmark ($7106 vs $5414; both flagship class). Pick Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallbac… when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Muse Wonder (Max).
| Metric | Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) | Muse Wonder (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 61.8 | 43.6 | −29.4% Muse Wonder (Max) is 29.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $7,105.77 | $5,414.45 | −23.8% Muse Wonder (Max) is 23.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 35.25s | 53.41s | +51.5% Muse Wonder (Max) is 51.5% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $8.00 / $40.0 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Muse Wonder (Max) vs Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback): 29.4% less intelligence, 23.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 51.5% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- Muse Wonder (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 57.40 for $4766.
Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback)Muse Wonder (Max)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-high/muse-wonder · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-fable-5-2-high/muse-wonder?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill