← comparisons · head to head
Muse Wonder vs Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher than Muse Wonder on all 4 public leaderboards that rate both. On the ArtificialWatch Index, which takes the median of each model's percentile across the boards that score it, Muse Wonder is at 84.5 and Claude Opus 5.5 at 100 (out of 100).
Scores as published by each board; table composed October 13, 2026.
Get the next launch alert, free →
Leaderboard by leaderboard
| Board | Muse Wonder | Claude Opus 5.5 | Higher |
|---|---|---|---|
| LiveBench global average (0-100) | 81.2 | 83.2 | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| LLM Stats LLM Stats Score · composite (0-100), their rendered top 15 | 52.1 | 60.7 | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Vals AI Vals Index accuracy % · weighted finance + coding tasks | 64.6 | 67 | Claude Opus 5.5 |
| Artificial Analysis intelligence index · measured runs only | 55.8 | 57.6 | Claude Opus 5.5 |
Raw scores are each board's own scale, so compare within a row, not across rows. Full table: the bench index.
For coding
On the ArtificialWatch coding index, Muse Wonder is at 73.3 (#11 of 36) and Claude Opus 5.5 at 96.9 (#1). Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on all 2 coding boards that rate both.
| Coding board | Muse Wonder | Claude Opus 5.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LiveBench · Coding | 71.7 | 80.5 |
| Vals Vibe Code Bench | 86 | 90.3 |
Muse Wonder at a glance
- Developer
- Meta
- Status
- Live since October 12, 2026
Live — Oct 12 · Meta's most capable model, a new line above Muse Spark · muse-wonder-1.0 on Meta Model API (preview) at $4 / $20 per 1M, $0.20 cached, no long-context premium · 1M ctx, 131K max output · Muse Wonder Full, the stronger variant, is in Muse Code only (Power and Maximum plans) · same $4 / $20 as Claude Opus 5.5 · Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (read on AA Oct 12): Wonder 52, Wonder Full 56; Claude Opus 5.5 58 on the same index per Meta's chart · Meta's own table has Wonder Full ahead of Opus 5.5 on 8 of 14 rows (two are Meta-internal: its Personal Superintelligence Index and MemoryBench; DeepSWE 1.1 79.0 vs 74.2, SWE-Marathon 57.5 vs 46.3) and behind on the other 6, including Terminal-Bench 4.0, ProgramBench (59.0 vs 70.5) and the AA index · Meta's launch materials do not use the Watermelon codename, but @kimmonismus, who says he had early access, called the model Meta's 'Watermelon' on Oct 12 after launch, so it was very likely Wonder's codename (Meta has not said).
Meta ships Muse Wonder at Opus 5.5's $4 / $20, and says Wonder Full beats Opus 5.5 on 8 of 14 benchmarks
2026-10-12 · Meta released Muse Wonder today, its most capable model and a new line above Muse Spark. Muse Wonder is on Meta Model API now as muse-wonder-1.0, at $4 per million input tokens and $20 per million output, the same price as Claude Opus 5.5.
Claude Opus 5.5 at a glance
- Developer
- Anthropic
- Status
- Live since September 22, 2026
- API price
- $4 input / $20 output per 1M tokens · Anthropic, claude-opus-5-5
- Context window
- 1M tokens
Live — Sep 22 · $4/$20 per MTok, down from Opus 5 at $5/$25 · 1M ctx / 128K out · adaptive thinking always on, default effort medium · cache reads 5% of base input · Anthropic now says start here for most workloads, and Opus 5 is legacy.
Claude Opus 5.5 fast mode costs a third less than GPT-6.1 Sol Ultrafast, but you need an invite
2026-10-10 · Claude Opus 5.5 in fast mode costs a third less than GPT-6.1 Sol Ultrafast on input, output and cached input, going by both companies' own pricing pages, read this morning.
Claude Opus 5.5 ships at $4/$20 - and that is LESS than the Opus 5 it replaces
2026-09-22 · Claude Opus 5.5 is live. Our sweep read the id claude-opus-5-5 at 16:24:44 UTC on September 22 and the alert went out at 16:25:45 - 61 seconds later, to 307 inboxes and one phone. The hunt that caught it was armed the previous day, before the model had a confirmed name, on the version range rather than on the rumour.
Muse Wonder vs Claude Opus 5.5: quick answers
Which is better, Muse Wonder or Claude Opus 5.5?
It depends on what you measure. Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher than Muse Wonder on all 4 public leaderboards that rate both. Claude Opus 5.5's widest lead is on LLM Stats. On the ArtificialWatch Index, which takes the median of each model's percentile across the boards that score it, Muse Wonder is at 84.5 and Claude Opus 5.5 at 100 (out of 100).
Which is newer, Muse Wonder or Claude Opus 5.5?
Muse Wonder. It went live on October 12, 2026, 20 days after Claude Opus 5.5 (September 22, 2026).
How do Muse Wonder and Claude Opus 5.5 compare for coding?
On the ArtificialWatch coding index, Muse Wonder is at 73.3 (#11 of 36) and Claude Opus 5.5 at 96.9 (#1). Claude Opus 5.5 scores higher on all 2 coding boards that rate both.
Who makes Muse Wonder and Claude Opus 5.5?
Muse Wonder is from Meta; Claude Opus 5.5 is from Anthropic.
Where do these numbers come from?
Each score is the leaderboard's own published figure, read by ArtificialWatch (table composed October 13, 2026). Boards measure different things, so raw scores are only comparable within a row.
More comparisons
Hear the minute the next one drops. Free.
A free Chrome push the moment a new model answers on a public API, an email about 15 minutes later. Texts or a phone call on paid plans.
- Free forever
- No card
- Unsubscribe in one click
Also: the bench index · API pricing · the wire