Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) vs Muse Glimmer (High)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) by Anthropic or Muse Glimmer (High) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) scores 24.8 points higher (42.3 vs 17.5) but costs 5.9× as much to run the benchmark ($860 vs $146; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 17.5, and Muse Glimmer (High) when 17.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) | Muse Glimmer (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 42.3 | 17.5 | −58.6% Muse Glimmer (High) is 58.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $860.33 | $145.77 | −83.1% Muse Glimmer (High) is 83.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.16s | 25.25s | +126.3% Muse Glimmer (High) is 126.3% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Glimmer (High) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback): 58.6% less intelligence, 83.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 126.3% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Xhigh) scores 51.00 for $662.
- Muse Glimmer (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Max) scores 38.10 for $122.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Low, Default Fallback)Muse Glimmer (High)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-low/muse-glimmer · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5-low/muse-glimmer?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill