Claude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Wonder
As of 13 Oct 2026, Muse Wonder (max) is the better pick for most workloads: it leads on quality (66.3 vs 62.3 on the BenchLeader Index) and costs 1.3× less.
Claude Opus 4.8 
Muse Wonder Key differences
- Muse Wonder (max) leads on quality: 66.3 vs 62.3.
- Claude Opus 4.8 (max) is stronger in agents & tools, coding, instruction following, maths.
- Muse Wonder (max) is stronger in composite, knowledge, long context, reasoning.
- Muse Wonder (max) is 1.3× cheaper ($8.00 vs $10.00 per 1M blended).
- Muse Wonder (max) streams 1.5× faster (85 vs 59 tokens per second).
Choose Claude Opus 4.8 (max) if
It does not lead on anything measured here; the other is the safer default.
Choose Muse Wonder (max) if
- reasoning is the priority (88 vs 69 on the category score)
- knowledge is the priority (73 vs 67 on the category score)
- long context is the priority (66 vs 64 on the category score)
- cost matters: $8.00 against $10.00 per million tokens blended
- you need fast output: 85 against 59 tokens per second
Category by category
Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.
| Category | Claude Opus 4.8 (max) | Muse Wonder (max) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 69.0 | 87.8 | Muse Wonder |
| Coding | 59.6 | – | not comparable |
| Agents & tools | 56.5 | – | not comparable |
| Maths | 68.4 | – | not comparable |
| Knowledge | 67.2 | 73.0 | Muse Wonder |
| Instruction following | 62.0 | – | not comparable |
| Long context | 63.9 | 65.5 | Muse Wonder |
| Composite | 65.0 | 78.2 | Muse Wonder |
Price, speed and latency
List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.
| Measure | Claude Opus 4.8 (max) | Muse Wonder (max) |
|---|---|---|
| Blended price per 1M tokens | $10.00 | $8.00 |
| Input / output per 1M | $5.00 / $25.00 | $4.00 / $20.00 |
| Price per task: chat reply | $0.0095 | $0.0076 |
| Price per task: summarise a 30-page report | $0.075 | $0.060 |
| Price per task: code edit | $0.068 | $0.054 |
| Price per task: agentic coding session | $0.400 | $0.320 |
| Price per task: structured extraction | $0.015 | $0.012 |
| Cost to run a full benchmark suite | $4.08 | $4.52 |
| Output speed | 59 tok/s | 85 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 52.1 s | 60.8 s |
| Time to a complete answer | 60.7 s | 66.7 s |
Every benchmark
| Metric | Claude Opus 4.8 (max) | Muse Wonder (max) |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 62.3 | 66.3 |
| Agents & tools score | 56.5 | – |
| Coding score | 59.6 | – |
| Composite score | 65.0 | 78.2 |
| Instruction following score | 62.0 | – |
| Knowledge score | 67.2 | 73.0 |
| Long context score | 63.9 | 65.5 |
| Maths score | 68.4 | – |
| Reasoning score | 69.0 | 87.8 |
| Blended price $/M | $10.00 | $8.00 |
| Output speed | 59 tok/s | 85 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 52.1 s | 60.8 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1.0M |
| GPQA Diamond | 91.0% | – |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | 80.0% | – |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 56.1% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 98.3% | – |
| SimpleQA Verified | 53.0% | – |
| Terminal-Bench | 23.6% | – |
| OSWorld-Verified 2.0 | 20.6% | – |
| SciCode | 53.5% | – |
| APEX-Agents | 48.9% | – |
| ProofBench | 69.0% | – |
| LiveBench | 76.2% | 81.2% |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 89.2% | 90.6% |
| LiveBench Coding | 81.8% | 80.7% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | 50.5% | 62.7% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | 94.3% | 96.5% |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 66.0% | 81.6% |
| LiveBench Language | 79.7% | 82.9% |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 72.0% | 73.0% |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 41.8 | 52.4 |
| IFBench | 62.2% | – |
| AA-LCR | 77.7% | 80.7% |
| AA-Omniscience | 28.8 | 25.5 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 58.3% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 92.0% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 48.7% | 50.1% |
| SciCode (AA) | 54.4% | 60.3% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 94.4% | – |
| AIME 2026 | 100.0% | – |
| HMMT February 2026 | 95.5% | – |
| MathArena Apex | 81.3% | – |
| MCP Atlas | 82.2% | – |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 92.5% | – |
| CritPt | 20.9% | 28.3% |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | 47.7% | 63.5% |
| τ³-Banking (AA) | 34.2% | – |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | 45.0% | – |
| DrugDiscoveryBench | 46.8% | – |
| FORTRESS | 18.2% | – |
| Chess Puzzles | 34.0% | – |
| EBR-bench | 28.6% | – |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 36.0% | – |
| PostTrainBench | 32.9% | – |
| DeepSWE v1.1 | 59.0% | – |
| LMCA | 57.5% | – |
| DTBench | 94.9% | – |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 2992.3 | – |
| GDP.pdf | 24.0% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 21.7% | 52.0% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA) | 84.6% | – |
| AutomationBench | – | 68.1% |
| GDP.pdf | – | 30.6% |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 48.8% | 41.1% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 60.8% | 73.5% |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | – | 1659 |
Data as of 2026-10-13. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Wonder: questions
- Is Claude Opus 4.8 better than Muse Wonder?
- Muse Wonder (max) leads on quality: 66.3 vs 62.3. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Muse Wonder (max) is ahead overall as of 2026-10-13, but check the category scores for your use.
- Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Wonder?
- Muse Wonder is cheaper: $8.00 against $10.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Wonder?
- Muse Wonder streams faster: 85 against 59 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Muse Wonder accepts more context: 1.0M against 1M tokens.