GPT-5.6 Luna (High) vs Muse Wonder (Max)
Which is better for the money: GPT-5.6 Luna (High) by OpenAI or Muse Wonder (Max) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Wonder (Max) scores 20.3 points higher (52.4 vs 32.1) but costs 54× as much to run the benchmark ($5787 vs $108; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Wonder (Max) when you need intelligence above 32.1, and GPT-5.6 Luna (High) when 32.1 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5.6 Luna (High) | Muse Wonder (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 32.1 | 52.4 | +63.2% Muse Wonder (Max) is 63.2% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $108.15 | $5,786.78 | +5250.7% Muse Wonder (Max) is 54× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 13.41s | 45.32s | +238.0% Muse Wonder (Max) is 238.0% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.20 / $1.20 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Muse Wonder (Max) vs GPT-5.6 Luna (High): 63.2% more intelligence, 5250.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 238.0% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5.6 Luna (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (High) scores 37.80 for $94.1.
- 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.
GPT-5.6 Luna (High)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/gpt-5-6-luna-high/muse-wonder · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-6-luna-high/muse-wonder?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill