Models / Muse Wonder

Meta

Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder is best for user surveys and product listings; pick it when quality matters more than cost.

Results 13 Oct 2026 · 84 results · 5 sources

Price per million tokens
$4.00 in · $20.00 out
Meta's list price, 13 Oct 2026 · compare prices$0.20 cached input
Speed
Not measured
Intelligence Index
Not measured
Spring Prompt overall
4th of 23 score 70 of 100 · how it works
Developer
Meta, based in the US
Weights not published
Released
12 Oct 2026
1,048,576 tokens of context
Pricing and availability
Standard Wonder. Muse Wonder Full is offered separately through Muse Code subscriptions.

Where it stands among the models you could choose

Available models grouped by price, intelligence, speed and developer location. Retired models are excluded.

AmongIntelligence IndexSpring Prompt overallPrice, blendedSpeed
Models available today – 4th of 23Claude Opus 5.5 $8.00 blended, 92nd percentilecheapest: Mistral Nemo –
Models priced $3–10 per million tokens – 3rd of 11Claude Opus 5.5 sets this group –
Models from developers based in the US – 4th of 15Claude Opus 5.5 $8.00 blended, 84th percentilecheapest: Llama 3.1 8B Instruct –

The name under each rank is the leader of that group; green is the top quarter of the group and red the bottom quarter, by rank. Price is shown as a percentile: the share of the group that costs less, so lower is cheaper. "Sets this group" marks the measure the group is defined by. Spring Prompt overall is our score out of 100 across every source (how it works). Price is the developer's list price (or the typical OpenRouter host where we haven't read one) for three input tokens to one output; intelligence and speed are from Artificial Analysis (data sourced from Artificial Analysis); "similar intelligence" means within 4 points on its Intelligence Index. Developer locations are where each company is based, not where a model is served. Groups under 3 models are not ranked.

Measured cost per task

API cost recorded in our benchmark runs, excluding judging.

TaskBenchmarkCost per task
Product listingCatalogBench≈ $0.036
DeckDeckBench≈ $0.182
Survey plan and analysisSurveyBench≈ $0.354
Game of blitz chessBulletBench≈ $0.267

How good is it, and for what?

Each use case ranks the available models its benchmarks measured, then those priced $3–10 per million tokens. The bar shows its percentile in that field, best to the right. Open a row for the results behind it.

Product listingsTurning a sparse product feed and photos into listings that can go live 4th of 21 available · 3rd of 11 at its price
BenchmarkMuse WonderRank among availableBest available
CatalogBenchCatalogBench: reliably publish-ready 66.1% 3rd of 21 GPT-6 Astra 75.0%
CatalogBenchCatalogBench (sales brief): reliably publish-ready 51.8% 4th of 21 GPT-6 Astra 69.6%
Decks from an analysisTurning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is 8th of 20 available · 5th of 11 at its price
BenchmarkMuse WonderRank among availableBest available
DeckBenchDeckBench: deck rating 1,273 8th of 20 GPT-6 Astra 1,492
User surveysPlanning a user survey and reading its results without being misled 2nd of 9 available · 2nd of 5 at its price
BenchmarkMuse WonderRank among availableBest available
SurveyBenchSurveyBench: analysis rating 1,460 2nd of 9 Claude Opus 5.5 1,499
Marketing planningPlanning a year of ad spend without overspending 10th of 20 available · 7th of 10 at its price
BenchmarkMuse WonderRank among availableBest available
ROASBenchROASBench: overall score 38.9 10th of 20 GPT-6 Astra 56.6
Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls PendingReleased after these sources last updated
  • tau2-bench: pending. Its latest results are dated 26 May 2026, before this model was released.
  • Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) V4: pending. Its latest results are dated 16 Dec 2025, before this model was released.
  • OpenHands Index: pending. Its latest results are dated 30 Jun 2026, before this model was released.
  • Microsoft STATE-Bench: pending. Its latest results are dated 29 May 2026, before this model was released.
  • Artificial Analysis: pending. Its latest results are dated 8 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
  • Vending-Bench 2: pending. Its latest results are dated 1 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
Professional workReal tasks from banking, consulting and law, business documents and freelance projects PendingReleased after these sources last updated
  • APEX-Agents: pending. Its latest results are dated 1 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
  • GDP.pdf: pending. Its latest results are dated 1 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
  • Remote Labor Index: pending. Its latest results are dated 1 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge PendingReleased after these sources last updated
  • Artificial Analysis: pending. Its latest results are dated 8 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality PendingReleased after these sources last updated
  • Arena (formerly LMArena): pending. Its latest results are dated 2 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
  • UGI Leaderboard: pending. Its latest results are dated 2 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers PendingReleased after these sources last updated
  • Vectara Hallucination Leaderboard: pending. Its latest results are dated 22 Sep 2026, before this model was released.
  • Arena (formerly LMArena): pending. Its latest results are dated 2 Oct 2026, before this model was released.
  • SimpleQA Verified (Epoch AI): pending. Its latest results are dated 29 Sep 2026, before this model was released.
Speed under pressureGood decisions against a real clock (fast chess) 12th of 24 available · 7th of 10 at its price
BenchmarkMuse WonderRank among availableBest available
BulletBenchBulletBench Bullet 60s: ladder Elo 409 13th of 22 Gemini 3.8 Flash 1,068

Nearest alternatives

  • The most capable open-weights modelMiMo-V2.6-Pro$0.54 blended · Intelligence Index 46.3

Against Muse Wonder at $8.00 blended. "Similar intelligence" means within 4 points or better.

Against the alternatives

The models you would most likely weigh it against: the leaders of the groups above.

Scroll sideways to see every alternative.

Muse WonderClaude Opus 5.5
highest-scoring overall at $3–10 per million tokens
GPT-6 Astra
just above overall
GPT-6 Sol
just below overall
Muse Spark 1.3
Meta's best other model
Price per million tokens $8.00 $8.00$20.00$4.00$2.00
Tokens a second – 9752–114
Intelligence Index – 57.652.747.648.1
Spring Prompt overall 70 85786964
Rank among available models, by use case
Product listings 4th of 21 7th1st3rd10th
Decks from an analysis 8th of 20 4th1st2nd13th
User surveys 2nd of 9 1st–––
Marketing planning 10th of 20 5th1st2nd13th
Agents and tool use pending 2nd4th5th9th
Professional work pending 3rd5th13th8th
Reasoning and knowledge pending 1st3rd11th8th
Writing pending 4th19th51st5th
Sticking to the facts pending 2nd24th49th11th
Speed under pressure 12th of 24 –16th10th21st

Shaded figures are better than Muse Wonder's. A dash means no result.

Research and examples

In the playground: our pick in 0 of 8 tests, 64% of checks passed →

Where it has been measured

3rd highest-scoring overall of the 11 models priced $3–10 per million tokens. Among models available today, in the top quarter (by percentile) for user surveys and product listings. Results for agents and tool use, professional work, reasoning and knowledge, writing, and sticking to the facts are pending: those sources last updated before this model was released.

Not timed: Artificial Analysis, our source for speed, has not tested it

Every result

84 published results from 5 sources, each in the source's own units, with the configuration that produced it.

BulletBench · measured by Spring Prompt · 10 results
MeasureValueRankConfigurationDated
BulletBench Blitz 3+2: cost per gameUS dollars, lower is better $0.27 12 of 15 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Blitz 3+2: games lost on time% of games, lower is better 75.0% 15 of 15 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Blitz 3+2: invalid moves% of moves, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 15 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Blitz 3+2: ladder Eloladder Elo, higher is better 358
0–600
14 of 15 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Blitz 3+2: median move timemilliseconds, lower is better 7.1 s 13 of 15 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Bullet 60s: cost per gameUS dollars, lower is better $0.0663 32 of 36 Muse Wonder (minimal reasoning)
minimal reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Bullet 60s: games lost on time% of games, lower is better 58.3% 25 of 36 Muse Wonder (minimal reasoning)
minimal reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Bullet 60s: invalid moves% of moves, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 36 Muse Wonder (minimal reasoning)
minimal reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Bullet 60s: ladder Eloladder Elo, higher is better 409
100–609
21 of 36 Muse Wonder (minimal reasoning)
minimal reasoning
12 Oct 2026
BulletBench Bullet 60s: median move timemilliseconds, lower is better 1.9 s 27 of 36 Muse Wonder (minimal reasoning)
minimal reasoning
12 Oct 2026

Not shown: Not your cost: prices are those charged on the run date.

CatalogBench · measured by Spring Prompt · 30 results
MeasureValueRankConfigurationDated
CatalogBench (sales brief): channel rules broken% of products, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): claims to check% of products, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): content quality% of checks, higher is better 98.5% 3 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): failed outputs% of products, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): missing UK information% of products, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): not findable% of products, lower is better 3.6% 8 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): publish-ready listings% of products, higher is better 67.3% 5 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): reliably publish-ready% of products, higher is better 51.8% 4 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): unsupported claims% of products, lower is better 17.9% 5 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): unsupported claimsclaims per product, lower is better 0.36 5 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): wrong attributes% of products, lower is better 14.3% 4 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench (sales brief): wrong category or variant% of products, lower is better 2.4% 10 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: channel compliance% of products, higher is better 99.4% 14 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: channel rules broken% of products, lower is better 0.6% 11 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: claims to check% of products, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: conflicts caught% of conflicts, higher is better 100.0% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: content quality% of checks, higher is better 98.3% 3 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: cost per productUS dollars, lower is better $0.0361 18 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: decision accuracy% of decisions, higher is better 98.3% 3 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: failed outputs% of products, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: field accuracy% of missing fields, higher is better 96.1% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: invented values% of filled values, lower is better 1.4% 11 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: missing UK information% of products, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: not findable% of products, lower is better 3.6% 4 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: publish-ready listings% of products, higher is better 75.0% 3 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: reliably publish-ready% of products, higher is better 66.1% 3 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: unsupported claims% of products, lower is better 7.1% 4 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: unsupported claimsclaims per product, lower is better 0.21 4 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: wrong attributes% of products, lower is better 13.1% 2 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
CatalogBench: wrong category or variant% of products, lower is better 2.4% 10 of 22 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026

Not shown: Not your catalogue: invented products with generated images, so a model's result on your own feed can differ.

DeckBench · measured by Spring Prompt · 16 results
MeasureValueRankConfigurationDated
DeckBench: accurate decks% of tasks, higher is better 100.0% 1 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: caveat dropped% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: clean layout% of tasks, higher is better 16.7% 18 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: cost per deckUS dollars, lower is better $0.18 14 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: deck ratingrating, higher is better 1,273
1,175–1,385
8 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: design quality% of the maximum, higher is better 67.1% 9 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: draft figure quoted% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: findings missing% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: head-to-head win rate% of comparisons, higher is better 63.2% 10 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: layout defects% of tasks, lower is better 83.3% 18 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: misleading metric used% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: presentable decks% of tasks, higher is better 16.7% 10 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: recommendation late or wrong% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: slides needing work% of tasks, lower is better 66.7% 15 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: unsupported claims% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
DeckBench: unsupported numbers% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 20 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026

Not shown: Not your analysis or your brand: invented companies, six public tasks, one deck per model per task at the provider's default reasoning setting.

ROASBench · measured by Spring Prompt · 9 results
MeasureValueRankConfigurationDated
ROASBench: audience scorescore out of 100, higher is better 54.7 12 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
ROASBench: business scorescore out of 100, higher is better 34.5 10 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
ROASBench: consistency scorescore out of 100, higher is better 25.9 12 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
ROASBench: contribution profitsimulated US dollars, higher is better $489,176 11 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
ROASBench: cost of a runUS dollars, lower is better $0.57 16 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
ROASBench: months over budgetmonths of 12, lower is better 0 1 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
ROASBench: overall scorescore out of 100, higher is better 38.9 10 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
ROASBench: planning scorescore out of 100, higher is better 55.0 4 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
ROASBench: return on ad spendprofit per $1 spent, higher is better $0.41 11 of 21 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026

Not shown: Not real ad performance: the market is a deterministic simulation of one invented skincare brand.

SurveyBench · measured by Spring Prompt · 19 results
MeasureValueRankConfigurationDated
SurveyBench: analysis ratingrating, higher is better 1,460
1,400–1,545
2 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: analysis scorepoints of 100, higher is better 96.2 2 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: cost per taskUS dollars, lower is better $0.35 8 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: head-to-head win rate% of comparisons, higher is better 67.9% 3 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: leading or double-barrelled questions% of tasks, lower is better 44.4% 5 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: mistaken next steps% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: numbers right% of answers, higher is better 100.0% 1 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: objectives unanswerable% of tasks, lower is better 11.1% 5 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: precision ignored% of tasks, lower is better 22.2% 4 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: research scorepoints of 100, higher is better 93.6 3 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: sound research% of tasks, higher is better 33.3% 3 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: stakeholder's view presumed% of tasks, lower is better 11.1% 4 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: survey plan scorepoints of 100, higher is better 87.8 5 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: survey structure% of tasks, lower is better 33.3% 8 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: traps handled% of traps, higher is better 100.0% 1 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: traps missed% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: unsupported findings% of tasks, lower is better 11.1% 2 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: wrong numbers% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026
SurveyBench: wrong recommendation% of tasks, lower is better 0.0% 1 of 9 Muse Wonder
provider default reasoning
12 Oct 2026

Not shown: Not your customers or your data: invented organisations with simulated respondents, nine public tasks, one run per model per task at the provider's default reasoning setting.