Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs Muse Glimmer (High)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, 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 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 40.1 points higher (57.6 vs 17.5) but costs 60× as much to run the benchmark ($8708 vs $146; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) when you need intelligence above 17.5, and Muse Glimmer (High) when 17.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | Muse Glimmer (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 57.6 | 17.5 | −69.6% Muse Glimmer (High) is 69.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $8,708.20 | $145.77 | −98.3% Muse Glimmer (High) is 98.3% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 626.13s | 24.76s | −96.0% Muse Glimmer (High) is 96.0% faster |
| 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 (Max, Default Fallback): 69.6% less intelligence, 98.3% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 96.0% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
- 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 (Max, 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/muse-glimmer · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/muse-glimmer?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill