Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) vs Muse Wonder (Max)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, 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 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) scores 5.2 points higher (57.6 vs 52.4) but costs 1.5× as much to run the benchmark ($8708 vs $5787; both flagship class). Pick Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Muse Wonder (Max).
| Metric | Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback) | Muse Wonder (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 57.6 | 52.4 | −9.0% Muse Wonder (Max) is 9.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $8,708.20 | $5,786.78 | −33.5% Muse Wonder (Max) is 33.5% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 626.13s | 41.43s | −93.4% Muse Wonder (Max) is 93.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Muse Wonder (Max) vs Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, Default Fallback): 9.0% less intelligence, 33.5% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 93.4% 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 Wonder (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
Claude Opus 5.5 (Max, 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-opus-5-5/muse-wonder · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-5/muse-wonder?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill