Muse Wonder (Max) vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Muse Wonder (Max) by Meta or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Wonder (Max) scores 43.2 points higher (52.4 vs 9.2) but costs 14× as much to run the benchmark ($5787 vs $405; flagship vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Wonder (Max) when you need intelligence above 9.2, and Qwen3 Coder Next when 9.2 is enough.
| Metric | Muse Wonder (Max) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 52.4 | 9.2 | −82.4% Qwen3 Coder Next is 82.4% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,786.78 | $405.10 | −93.0% Qwen3 Coder Next is 93.0% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 40.70s | 6.20s | −84.8% Qwen3 Coder Next is 84.8% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.31 / $1.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Muse Wonder (Max): 82.4% less intelligence, 93.0% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 84.8% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- 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.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Medium) scores 47.80 for $361.
Muse Wonder (Max)Qwen3 Coder NextToday'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/muse-wonder/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-wonder/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill