← ModelRumors.ai buyer's guide
HEAD TO HEAD · UPDATED NOV 6, 2026
Muse Wonder vs Claude Sonnet 5.5
Meta against Anthropic, on sourced numbers only. Green marks the higher (or cheaper) value on each row; the text below only calls a lead when the gap is bigger than measurement noise.
| Muse Wonder | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | |
|---|---|---|
| Arena Elo | 1507 source ↗ | 1477 source ↗ |
| GPQA Diamond | not published | 95.6% source ↗ |
| $ per 1M in / out | $4 / $20 source ↗ | $2 / $10 source ↗ |
| Blended $ per 1M (3:1) | $8.00 source ↗ | $4.00 source ↗ |
| Context window | not published | 1M source ↗ |
| Output speed | not published | 155 tok/s source ↗ |
| Released | Oct 12, 2026 source ↗ | Sep 28, 2026 source ↗ |
| Open weights | No source ↗ | No source ↗ |
| Reasoning effort tiers | minimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · max (default: not stated) | low · medium · high · xhigh · max (default: high) |
| API effort control | reasoning_effort="minimal" | "low" | "medium" | "high" | "xhigh" | "max" (Chat Completions) source ↗ | output_config={"effort": "low" | "medium" | "high" | "xhigh" | "max"} source ↗ |
| Additional benchmarks | Arena Text: 1507 (#4, Max effort) source ↗ | SWE-bench Pro: 81.3% source ↗ AA Intelligence Index v5.0.1: 55 source ↗ |
| Best for (workload) | Meta's highest-ranked model on Arena Text (1507, #4 at Max effort). The API is in preview. source ↗ | Fast (155 tok/s, Artificial Analysis) and strong on science: 95.6% GPQA Diamond at max effort (Epoch AI), above Opus 5.5's 90.6%. source ↗ |
Arena Elo from the arena.ai text leaderboard as of Oct 27, 2026 source ↗. Speed measured by Artificial Analysis and varies by provider.
Which one should I use?
For high-volume work where cost matters most, Claude Sonnet 5.5 is about 2.0 times cheaper per token. For overall answer quality as rated by people in blind tests, Muse Wonder leads clearly (1507 vs 1477 Arena Elo). On release timing, Meta is at day 22 of a typical ~14-day gap (PAST TYPICAL GAP), and Anthropic is at day 30 of a typical ~15-day gap (PAST TYPICAL GAP).
Key differences from the sourced numbers
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the cheaper option: $4.00 vs $8.00 per 1M tokens at a 3:1 input-to-output mix (about 2.0 times less).
- Muse Wonder scores 30 Elo points higher (1507 vs 1477) on the Arena text leaderboard, where people vote on blind side-by-side answers.
- Muse Wonder pricing note: Meta Model API, in preview.
- Claude Sonnet 5.5 pricing note: Same rate across the full 1M context window.
Frequently asked questions
Is Muse Wonder or Claude Sonnet 5.5 better?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the cheaper option: $4.00 vs $8.00 per 1M tokens at a 3:1 input-to-output mix (about 2.0 times less). Muse Wonder scores 30 Elo points higher (1507 vs 1477) on the Arena text leaderboard, where people vote on blind side-by-side answers. Muse Wonder pricing note: Meta Model API, in preview. Claude Sonnet 5.5 pricing note: Same rate across the full 1M context window.
Which one should I use: Muse Wonder or Claude Sonnet 5.5?
For high-volume work where cost matters most, Claude Sonnet 5.5 is about 2.0 times cheaper per token. For overall answer quality as rated by people in blind tests, Muse Wonder leads clearly (1507 vs 1477 Arena Elo). On release timing, Meta is at day 22 of a typical ~14-day gap (PAST TYPICAL GAP), and Anthropic is at day 30 of a typical ~15-day gap (PAST TYPICAL GAP).
How much does Muse Wonder cost compared with Claude Sonnet 5.5?
Muse Wonder lists at $4 / $20 per 1M input/output tokens ($8.00/1M blended at 3:1). Claude Sonnet 5.5 lists at $2 / $10 per 1M input/output tokens ($4.00/1M blended at 3:1).
Facts checked Nov 5, 2026 against official sources. Every number links to its source. Spotted an error? Email [email protected].