Muse Wonder (Max) vs Ring-2.6-1T
Which is better for the money: Muse Wonder (Max) by Meta or Ring-2.6-1T by InclusionAI? 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 35.8 points higher (52.4 vs 16.6) but costs 10× as much to run the benchmark ($5787 vs $576; flagship vs premium cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Wonder (Max) when you need intelligence above 16.6, and Ring-2.6-1T when 16.6 is enough.
| Metric | Muse Wonder (Max) | Ring-2.6-1T | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 52.4 | 16.6 | −68.3% Ring-2.6-1T is 68.3% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $5,786.78 | $575.60 | −90.1% Ring-2.6-1T is 90.1% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 40.70s | 24.04s | −40.9% Ring-2.6-1T is 40.9% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $4.00 / $20.0 | $0.30 / $2.50 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Speech, Video | Text |
Ring-2.6-1T vs Muse Wonder (Max): 68.3% less intelligence, 90.1% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 40.9% 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.
- Ring-2.6-1T is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (High) scores 50.20 for $521.
Muse Wonder (Max)Ring-2.6-1TToday'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/ring-2-6-1t · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-wonder/ring-2-6-1t?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill