Gemini 4 Carbon (High) vs Muse Ember (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Gemini 4 Carbon (High) by Google or Muse Ember (Xhigh) 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
Gemini 4 Carbon (High) scores 25.9 points higher (60.0 vs 34.1) but costs 86× as much to run the benchmark ($8240 vs $95.7; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Gemini 4 Carbon (High) when you need intelligence above 34.1, and Muse Ember (Xhigh) when 34.1 is enough.
| Metric | Gemini 4 Carbon (High) | Muse Ember (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 60.0 | 34.1 | −43.2% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 43.2% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $8,239.69 | $95.73 | −98.8% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 98.8% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 103.67s | 9.48s | −90.9% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 90.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.10 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text, Image |
Muse Ember (Xhigh) vs Gemini 4 Carbon (High): 43.2% less intelligence, 98.8% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 90.9% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Gemini 4 Carbon (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Fable 5.2 (High, Default Fallback) scores 61.80 for $7106.
- Muse Ember (Xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
Gemini 4 Carbon (High)Muse Ember (Xhigh)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/gemini-4-carbon/muse-ember-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gemini-4-carbon/muse-ember-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill