Meta launched Muse Wonder on October 12, 2026, its first frontier model since restructuring its AI division. The question for anyone who codes is simple: is it worth swapping Claude Opus 5.5 for Muse Wonder? According to Artificial Analysis, Opus 5.5 is still ahead on score (58 vs 52), while Muse Wonder charges the same per token but spends less per task.
This article compares the two using public sources and separates what Meta claims from what third parties measured.
Is Muse Wonder better than Claude Opus 5.5?
Not on overall score. On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Opus 5.5 scores 58 and Muse Wonder scores 52. Muse Wonder wins on cost: US$ 4.52 per index task against US$ 5.98 for Opus 5.5, about 24% less.
| Attribute | Muse Wonder | Claude Opus 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score | 52 | 58 |
| Price per million tokens (input / output) | US$ 4 / US$ 20 | US$ 4 / US$ 20 |
| Cost per index task | US$ 4.52 | US$ 5.98 |
| Cost per index point | US$ 0.087 | US$ 0.103 |
| Output speed | 88 tokens/s | 95.4 tokens/s |
| Context window | 1 million tokens | 1 million tokens |
| Access | Meta API (muse-wonder-1.0) | Anthropic API |
Sources: Artificial Analysis (artificialanalysis.ai, model pages and the Meta provider page), dev.meta.ai/models/muse-wonder, accessed on 10/13/2026. Cost per point = cost per task divided by score, our calculation. The Muse Wonder score is the "max" configuration listed by Artificial Analysis.
Why doesn't the same per-token price mean the same cost?
Because you pay for generated tokens, and each model spends a different amount to do the same task. Artificial Analysis describes Opus 5.5 as "very verbose": 260 million output tokens to run the index, against a median of 85 million. That is where the US$ 1.46 per task gap in favor of Muse Wonder comes from.
Even so, each score point of Muse Wonder costs US$ 0.087, against US$ 0.103 for Opus. The saving is real, but it is 16% per point, not an order of magnitude. With prices this close, what decides is whether the 6-point gap shows up in your task.
What about Muse Wonder Full, which Meta says is better?
Wonder Full is not in the API. It only exists inside Muse Code subscriptions, at US$ 50 a month (Power Usage, 20 times the standard allowance) and US$ 200 a month (Maximum Usage, 80 times). According to VentureBeat, it scores 56 on Artificial Analysis, still below the 58 of Opus 5.5.
On coding tests, the numbers differ between sources. Meta's page lists Wonder Full at 59.0 on DeepSWE and 56 on SWE-Marathon, against 55.5 and 53 for Opus 5.5. VentureBeat reports different values for the same tests (79.0 and 57.5). Since the two sources do not match, treat these numbers as vendor claims until there is independent measurement.
When is each one the right choice?
| Situation | Pick | Why |
|---|---|---|
| Hard task where a mistake means rework | Claude Opus 5.5 | 6 points ahead on the index and the top score among the 216 models listed |
| High volume of medium tasks via API | Muse Wonder | US$ 1.46 less per index task at the same per-token price |
| You want Wonder Full | Muse Code subscription | Not in the API; costs US$ 50 or US$ 200 a month |
| Deciding by score alone | Don't | The index measures one slice. Run your own task on both and count the attempts |
When two models are a few points apart, what decides is how many times you can afford to run the same task to compare. On Verboo Code the plans run with unlimited tokens, so trying another model with /model does not raise your bill.
