Muse Wonder vs Claude Fable 5

  • Muse Wonder rates higher on LMArena’s text leaderboard: 1501 against 1491.
  • Muse Wonder is cheaper: $4 / $20 per million input / output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.
  • On the 5 Vals AI benchmarks both have taken, Muse Wonder wins 3 and Claude Fable 5 wins 2 (Muse Wonder: Terminal-Bench 4.0, Legal Research Bench, Terminal-Bench Science).
LMArena text rating over time
14801488149515031510Jun 26Jul 26Aug 26Sep 26Oct 26
LatestClaude Fable 5 1491

Side by side

Models (2/6)
  • Muse Wonder
  • Claude Fable 5
BenchmarkMuse WonderClaude Fable 5
The model
LabMetaAnthropic
Released2026-10-122026-06-09
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1M1M
Input, per 1M tokens$4$10
Output, per 1M tokens$20$50
LMArena, people’s votes
LMArena TextMillions of people compare two anonymous models side by side and vote for the better answer1501#7 of 3511491#12 of 351
LMArena WebDevPeople ask two anonymous models to build the same web app, try both and vote for the better one1651#18 of 1241624#24 of 124
LMArena VisionSide-by-side votes on prompts that include an image—1325#1 of 146
LMArena CodingLMArena’s text votes on prompts that ask for code1518#11 of 3461518#10 of 346
LMArena MathLMArena’s text votes on math prompts1484#30 of 3391516#8 of 339
LMArena Creative writingLMArena’s text votes on stories, poems and other creative writing1493#7 of 3491493#6 of 349
LMArena Hard promptsLMArena’s text votes on the hardest prompts1505#12 of 3511507#10 of 351
LMArena Instruction followingLMArena’s text votes on prompts with specific instructions to follow1493#10 of 3511502#8 of 351
Vals AI, overall
Vals IndexVals AI’s headline score64.88%#6 of 27—
Vals AI, coding
Terminal-Bench 4.0Frontier-difficulty tasks an agent completes in a real terminal49.49%#10 of 5541.41%#12 of 55
SWE-benchReal GitHub issues from open-source projects—95.00%#7 of 85
Vibe Code BenchBuilding complete web apps from a plain-language brief, graded on whether the app works83.09%#20 of 11590.35%#4 of 115
Code MigrationRewriting working programs in a new language, graded on whether the new program still passes its tests72.36%#5 of 28—
LiveCodeBenchFresh competitive programming problems, collected after models’ training cut-offs to avoid contamination—89.78%#2 of 143
Vals AI, finance
Finance AgentThe core tasks of a financial analyst, done as an agent with research tools65.55%#6 of 31—
Finance IndexVals AI’s composite of finance tasks61.23%#6 of 31—
Tax Agent BenchAgentic research into US corporate tax questions36.27%#12 of 7638.28%#11 of 76
Vals AI, law
Legal IndexVals AI’s composite of legal tasks75.26%#3 of 28—
Legal Research BenchAgentic US legal research50.48%#6 of 8549.52%#8 of 85
Vals AI, medicine
MedCodeAssigning the right medical billing codes from clinical notes—56.07%#4 of 107
Vals AI, reasoning
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level questions in biology, physics and chemistry that experts answer well and search does not—93.18%#10 of 138
MMLU-ProHarder, reasoning-focused multiple choice across 14 subjects, from law to engineering—91.50%#3 of 138
MMMUCollege-level questions that need both an image and text—89.31%#3 of 93
Terminal-Bench ScienceExpert-written scientific research workflows, run by an agent in a terminal22.86%#10 of 4215.71%#12 of 42

Add models in the compare tool.

Questions

Which is better, Muse Wonder or Claude Fable 5?

Muse Wonder rates higher on LMArena’s text leaderboard: 1501 against 1491. Muse Wonder is cheaper: $4 / $20 per million input / output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5. On the 5 Vals AI benchmarks both have taken, Muse Wonder wins 3 and Claude Fable 5 wins 2 (Muse Wonder: Terminal-Bench 4.0, Legal Research Bench, Terminal-Bench Science).

Which is cheaper, Muse Wonder or Claude Fable 5?

Muse Wonder is cheaper: $4 / $20 per million input / output tokens, against $10 / $50 for Claude Fable 5.

Sources

Every number on this page comes from these sources; models without a published number show none. Download the data. Cite as “Nexus Explorer, nexus.inc/models”.