GPT-5 mini (High) vs Muse Wonder (Max)
Which is better for the money: GPT-5 mini (High) by OpenAI or Muse Wonder (Max) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-24.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Wonder (Max) scores 35.6 points higher (52.4 vs 16.8) but costs 31× as much to run the benchmark ($5787 vs $189; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Wonder (Max) when you need intelligence above 16.8, and GPT-5 mini (High) when 16.8 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-5 mini (High) | Muse Wonder (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 16.8 | 52.4 | +211.9% Muse Wonder (Max) is 3.1× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $188.66 | $5,786.78 | +2967.3% Muse Wonder (Max) is 31× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 58.72s | 41.43s | −29.4% Muse Wonder (Max) is 29.4% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $2.00 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Muse Wonder (Max) vs GPT-5 mini (High): 211.9% more intelligence, 2967.3% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 29.4% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-5 mini (High) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Xhigh) scores 41.20 for $158.
- 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 mini (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-mini/muse-wonder · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-5-mini/muse-wonder?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill