Llama 4 Maverick vs Muse Wonder (Max)
Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Maverick by Meta 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 43.1 points higher (52.4 vs 9.3) but costs 132× as much to run the benchmark ($5787 vs $44.0; flagship vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Wonder (Max) when you need intelligence above 9.3, and Llama 4 Maverick when 9.3 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Maverick | Muse Wonder (Max) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 9.3 | 52.4 | +463.4% Muse Wonder (Max) is 5.6× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $43.98 | $5,786.78 | +13057.8% Muse Wonder (Max) is 132× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 11.18s | 41.43s | +270.6% Muse Wonder (Max) is 270.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.25 / $0.92 | $4.00 / $20.0 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Muse Wonder (Max) vs Llama 4 Maverick: 463.4% more intelligence, 13057.8% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 270.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Maverick is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Medium) scores 29.90 for $31.2.
- 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.
Llama 4 MaverickMuse Wonder (Max)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-maverick/muse-wonder · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-maverick/muse-wonder?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill