GPT-6 Luna (Medium) vs Muse Wonder (Max)
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Luna (Medium) 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 22.5 points higher (52.4 vs 29.9) but costs 186× as much to run the benchmark ($5787 vs $31.2; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Wonder (Max) when you need intelligence above 29.9, and GPT-6 Luna (Medium) when 29.9 is enough.
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna (Medium) | Muse Wonder (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 29.9 | 52.4 | +75.3% Muse Wonder (Max) is 75.3% more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $31.17 | $5,786.78 | +18465.2% Muse Wonder (Max) is 186× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 8.25s | 41.43s | +402.2% Muse Wonder (Max) is 402.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Muse Wonder (Max) vs GPT-6 Luna (Medium): 75.3% more intelligence, 18465.2% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 402.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Luna (Medium) 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.
GPT-6 Luna (Medium)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-6-luna-medium/muse-wonder · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-luna-medium/muse-wonder?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill