Skip to content
ModelCap

Head-to-head comparison

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder

Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Anthropic) and Muse Wonder (Meta) compared on the ModelCap Index, API price, context window, provider availability, weight access and every public benchmark board they share. Figures are the same ones shown on the live rankings; nothing here is a hidden score.

Snapshot as of 12 October 2026

As of 12 October 2026, Muse Wonder holds the stronger ModelCap Index position (#6 vs #14); and Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 2× cheaper per output token ($10.00/1M vs $20.00/1M).

Which should you choose?

Choose Claude Sonnet 5.5 if…

  • API cost matters — $10.00/1M output tokens against $20.00/1M, about 2× cheaper.
  • your workload is prompt-heavy — input tokens cost $2.00/1M against $4.00/1M.
  • you want provider choice — 5 listed API providers against 1.
  • AA Intelligence Index is your yardstick — 56.0 against 52.4.
  • AA Humanity's Last Exam is your yardstick — 55.0% against 50.1%.

Choose Muse Wonder if…

  • you want the stronger overall ModelCap Index position — #6 against #14 (83.0 vs 80.8 points).
  • you want the more recently listed model — Muse Wonder was listed 12 October 2026, Claude Sonnet 5.5 28 September 2026.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder: specs, pricing and context

Specification comparison of Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Wonder
FieldClaude Sonnet 5.5AnthropicMuse WonderMeta
ModelCap Index position#14#6
Index score80.883.0
EvidenceMeasuredEstimated
Input price / 1M tokens$2.00$4.00
Output price / 1M tokens$10.00$20.00
Context window1M tokens1M tokens
Declared route output cap128K944K
API providers listed51
Weight accessNo linked weightsNo linked weights
Input modalitiesText, Image, FileText, Image, Video, File, Audio
First listed28 September 202612 October 2026
PublisherAnthropicMeta

Evidence: 3 public benchmark observations across 3 boards · 1 reported rows against measured corpus ladders (69%); publisher-corpus-prior over 211 held-out anchors (31%); shrunk 0.2 up toward the measured corpus. Prices are the lowest listed API offer per million tokens observed on the OpenRouter catalogue.

Benchmark scores: Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder

Public benchmark boards where Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Wonder has a published result
BoardClaude Sonnet 5.5Muse WonderLeads
Arena textArena (LMArena)14761467–1485X-High—Only one result
Arena codingArena (LMArena)15321515–1549X-High—Only one result
LMArena AgentLMArena12.0%8.6%–15.3%Max—Only one result
AA Intelligence IndexArtificial Analysis56.0Reasoning52.4MaxClaude Sonnet 5.5
AA Humanity's Last ExamArtificial Analysis55.0%Reasoning50.1%MaxClaude Sonnet 5.5
Terminal-Bench 4.0Terminal-Bench (Laude Institute)61.8%58.9%–64.8%Claude Code · Max—Only one result

Scores are the sources' own published figures for each model's best evaluated configuration; ModelCap never re-runs a benchmark.

Want a different pairing? Open the interactive comparison tool to swap either model for any current ranked language model.

Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder: common questions

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than Muse Wonder?

Muse Wonder ranks higher on the ModelCap Index as of 12 October 2026: #6 against #14. That is a capability ranking built from public benchmark evidence with published uncertainty; whether it is "better" for you also depends on price, context and where you can run it. Their published uncertainty intervals overlap, so the rank difference alone does not establish a reliable capability advantage for your workload.

Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 cheaper than Muse Wonder?

Claude Sonnet 5.5 is cheaper on output tokens: $10.00/1M against $20.00/1M. Input tokens are $2.00/1M for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and $4.00/1M for Muse Wonder. Prices are the lowest listed API offer ModelCap observed, in USD per million tokens. For 1,000 requests with 2,000 input and 500 output tokens each (2M input + 0.5M output), the listed-rate estimate is $9.00 for Claude Sonnet 5.5 versus $18.00 for Muse Wonder. Claude Sonnet 5.5 costs 50.0% less in this scenario. This excludes caching, batch discounts, prompt-length tiers, tool charges and retries; verify the selected endpoint before budgeting.

Which has the bigger context window, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Wonder?

Both publish a 1M-token context window. OpenRouter catalogue or provider-endpoint declaration. Limits can vary by provider and prompt length; a model-wide maximum has not been independently verified.

Which is better for coding, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Wonder?

The two models do not share a coding benchmark board on ModelCap yet, so no head-to-head coding score is published; the ModelCap Index position is the closest overall signal.

Are Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Wonder open-weight models?

Claude Sonnet 5.5: No linked weights. Muse Wonder: No linked weights. Open weights mean the checkpoint can be downloaded and self-hosted under its licence. A missing weight link does not identify every API or chat product that offers a model.

Where can I run Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Wonder?

ModelCap currently lists 5 API providers for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 1 for Muse Wonder, from the OpenRouter catalogue snapshot the site serves; each model page lists the providers and their prices.

How current is this Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder comparison?

Every figure and ModelCap Index position comes from the same published snapshot dated 12 October 2026. Publication and page updates happen separately; use the snapshot date shown on the page.

Explore further