GPT-6 Luna (Non-reasoning) vs Muse Ember (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: GPT-6 Luna (Non-reasoning) by OpenAI 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
Muse Ember (Xhigh) scores 24.7 points higher (34.1 vs 9.4) but costs 1.8× as much to run the benchmark ($95.7 vs $53.1; both mid-range class). Pick Muse Ember (Xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise GPT-6 Luna (Non-reasoning).
| Metric | GPT-6 Luna (Non-reasoning) | Muse Ember (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.4 | 34.1 | +262.8% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 3.6× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $53.14 | $95.73 | +80.1% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 80.1% more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 6.11s | 9.48s | +55.2% Muse Ember (Xhigh) is 55.2% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.10 / $0.50 | $0.10 / $0.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
Muse Ember (Xhigh) vs GPT-6 Luna (Non-reasoning): 262.8% more intelligence, 80.1% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 55.2% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- GPT-6 Luna (Non-reasoning) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Haiku 5.5 (Low) scores 18.60 for $39.6.
- Muse Ember (Xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
GPT-6 Luna (Non-reasoning)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/gpt-6-luna-non-reasoning/muse-ember-xhigh · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/gpt-6-luna-non-reasoning/muse-ember-xhigh?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill