Claude Opus 5 (High) vs Muse Glimmer (High)
Which is better for the money: Claude Opus 5 (High) 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 (High) scores 30.6 points higher (48.1 vs 17.5) but costs 30× as much to run the benchmark ($4332 vs $146; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Claude Opus 5 (High) when you need intelligence above 17.5, and Muse Glimmer (High) when 17.5 is enough.
| Metric | Claude Opus 5 (High) | Muse Glimmer (High) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 48.1 | 17.5 | −63.6% Muse Glimmer (High) is 63.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $4,331.68 | $145.77 | −96.6% Muse Glimmer (High) is 96.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 20.99s | 24.76s | +18.0% Muse Glimmer (High) is 18.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $5.00 / $25.0 | $0.30 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Glimmer (High) vs Claude Opus 5 (High): 63.6% less intelligence, 96.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 18.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Claude Opus 5 (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (Xhigh, Default Fallback) scores 56.00 for $4057.
- 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 (High)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-high/muse-glimmer · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/claude-opus-5-high/muse-glimmer?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill