Kimi K3.1 Pro Together vs Muse Wonder
Full profiles: Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (Moonshot AI) and Muse Wonder (Meta): every benchmark, price and rank.
Updated · Data from 9 sources
As of 9 Nov 2026, Kimi K3.1 Pro Together and Muse Wonder are neck and neck on quality (60.5 vs 63.5 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±6.1 margin). Muse Wonder leads in every category we measure both in.
Key facts (as of 9 Nov 2026)
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together scores 60.5 on the BenchLeader Index and Muse Wonder scores 63.5 (BenchLeader, 9 Nov 2026).
- Muse Wonder costs $8.00 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 9 Nov 2026).
Kimi K3.1 Pro Together benchmarks 
Muse Wonder benchmarks Which to pick for…
The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.
| Use case | Pick | Why | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Maths | Muse Wonder | 71 vs 66 category score | Medium |
| Knowledge | Muse Wonder | 77 vs 68 category score | High |
| Chat quality (human preference) | – | Only Muse Wonder has an Arena rating (70 category score) | Not comparable |
| High volume on a budget | Neither flagship | A smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs | – |
Key differences
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) and Muse Wonder are neck and neck on quality (60.5 vs 63.5, within the ±6.1 margin).
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) is stronger in reasoning.
- Muse Wonder is stronger in knowledge, maths, agents & tools, composite, human preference.
At a glance
| Spec | Kimi K3.1 Pro Together | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Moonshot AI | Meta |
| Released | 23 Oct 2026 | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Context window (tokens) | – | 1,048,576 |
| Compared at | Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) | Muse Wonder |
| Open weights | No | No |
| Price in / out / cached input per 1M | – | $4.00 / $20.00 / $0.200 |
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 | Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) | Muse Wonder | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 67.1 | – | not comparable |
| Agents & tools | – | 77.2 | not comparable |
| Maths | 65.8 | 70.7 | Muse Wonder |
| Knowledge | 67.6 | 77.0 | Muse Wonder |
| Human preference | – | 69.6 | not comparable |
| Composite | – | 57.1 | not comparable |
On one chart
Each domain on the index's own scale, where 50 is an average model. Click a domain to see the benchmarks behind it. Pick up to 5 models from the list.
Dashed: that model has no result on the axis it crosses; the line only joins its neighbours.
Not drawn, no result for these models: Coding, Instruction following, Long context, Multimodal.
Where sources disagree
Across the 0 benchmarks both have, Kimi K3.1 Pro Together leads 0, Muse Wonder leads 0.
| Overall index | Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) | Muse Wonder | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 60.5 | 63.5 | neck and neck |
Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).
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. Cost, tokens and time per benchmark task are measured: Artificial Analysis’ averages over its whole Intelligence Index run.
| Measure | Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|
| Blended price per 1M tokens | – | $8.00 |
| Input / output per 1M | – / – | $4.00 / $20.00 |
| Cached input per 1M | – | $0.200 |
| Price per task: chat reply | – | $0.0076 |
| Price per task: summarize a 30-page report | – | $0.060 |
| Price per task: code edit | – | $0.054 |
| Price per task: agentic coding session | – | $0.320 |
| Price per task: structured extraction | – | $0.012 |
| Agentic coding session, input mostly cached | – | $0.149 |
| Output speed | – | 82 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | – | 3.2 s |
Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) scores 60.5. Muse Wonder scores 63.5 and takes 3 s to its first answer token; Muse Wonder (max) scores 61.9 in 21 s, Muse Wonder (high) scores 56.3 in 9 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.
Every benchmark
102 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.
| Metric | Publisher | Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | BenchLeader | 60.5 | 63.5 |
| Knowledge score | BenchLeader | 67.6 | 77.0 |
| Maths score | BenchLeader | 65.8 | 70.7 |
| Reasoning score | BenchLeader | 67.1 | – |
| Agents & tools score | BenchLeader | – | 77.2 |
| Composite score | BenchLeader | – | 57.1 |
| Human preference score | BenchLeader | – | 69.6 |
| Blended price $/M | BenchLeader | – | $8.00 |
| Output speed | BenchLeader | – | 82 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | BenchLeader | – | 3.2 s |
| Context window | BenchLeader | – | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Reasoning | |||
| GPQA Diamond | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 94.2% | – |
| Arena Hard Prompts | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1533† |
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoning | LiveBench | – | 90.6% |
| LiveBench 1.0 Reasoning | LiveBench | – | 90.6%† |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 50.1%† |
| HLE-Diamond (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 39.0%† |
| CritPt | Artificial Analysis | – | 28.3%† |
| CritPt v2 hard subset (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 50.5%† |
| MysteryMechanism | Vals AI | – | 27.5%† |
| Chess Puzzles | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 45.0% | – |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 42.0% | 51.0%† |
| LMCA | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 56.8% |
| DTBench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 95.2% |
| Coding | |||
| SciCode | SciCode | – | 60.3%† |
| Arena Coding | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1546† |
| Arena WebDev | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1650† |
| LiveBench 2.0 Coding | LiveBench | – | 74.9% |
| LiveBench 1.0 Coding | LiveBench | – | 80.7%† |
| IOI | Vals AI | – | 66.9%† |
| Code Migration | Vals AI | – | 62.5%† |
| Code Migration v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 72.4%† |
| SWE-bench Multimodal | Vals AI | – | 45.6%† |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 | Vals AI | – | 26.6%† |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 83.1%† |
| CursorBench | Cursor | – | 50.4%† |
Show all 102 benchmarks
| Metric | Publisher | Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | |||
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 52.0%† |
| Startrise Frontend | Startrise | – | 75.3% |
| GameBench 2 Overall | DuelLab GameBench 2 | – | 64.5 |
| GameBench 2 by reasoning setting | DuelLab GameBench 2 | – | 55.0† |
| Design Arena Website | Design Arena | – | 1368† |
| FrontierCode 1.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 46.5%† |
| FrontierCode 2.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 27.9%† |
| Agents & tools | |||
| APEX-Agents | Mercor | – | 66.1%† |
| Arena Agent | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1.9† |
| LiveBench Long Agentic | LiveBench | – | 46.2% |
| LiveBench Browser | LiveBench | – | 60.0% |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | LiveBench | – | 62.7%† |
| HiL-Bench | Scale AI SEAL | – | 79.7% |
| GDPval-AA v2.1, normalised score | Artificial Analysis | – | 63.5%† |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 1770† |
| CUA-bench | Vals AI | – | 7.2%† |
| CyberBench | Vals AI | – | 80.4%† |
| Finance Agent v2 | Vals AI | – | 56.6%† |
| Finance Agent v2.1 | Vals AI | – | 65.5%† |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 23.8%† |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1 | Vals AI | – | 17.1%† |
| Legal Research Bench | Vals AI | – | 50.5%† |
| Tax Agent Bench | Vals AI | – | 36.3%† |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | Vals AI | – | 49.5%† |
| Terminal-Bench Science | Vals AI | – | 22.9%† |
| Vending-Bench 2 | Andon Labs | – | 9432.2 |
| AutomationBench | Artificial Analysis | – | 68.1%† |
| GDP.pdf (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 30.6%† |
| Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 | Harvey | – | 10.0%† |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 1659† |
| GDPx | GDPx by SemiAnalysis | – | 6.8%† |
| Design Arena Agentic | Design Arena | – | 1166† |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 25.7%† |
| Maths | |||
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 78.3% | 82.1%† |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 65.8% | 70.7%† |
| OTIS Mock AIME | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 100.0% | 99.4%† |
| ProofBench | Vals AI | – | 84.0% |
| LiveBench Mathematics | LiveBench | – | 96.5%† |
| Arena Maths | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1495† |
| Knowledge | |||
| SimpleQA Verified | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 62.2% | – |
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysis | LiveBench | – | 81.6% |
| LiveBench Research | LiveBench | – | 93.0% |
| LiveBench 1.0 Data Analysis | LiveBench | – | 81.6%† |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 25.1† |
| PRBench Finance | Scale AI SEAL | – | 58.7% |
| PRBench Legal | Scale AI SEAL | – | 58.4% |
| BioMysteryBench | Vals AI | – | 67.0%† |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | Vals AI | – | 67.1%† |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 72.5%† |
| Public Benefits Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 70.2%† |
| EBR-bench | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 31.4%† |
| GDP.pdf | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 30.8%† |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1: accuracy | Artificial Analysis | – | 38.0%† |
| AA-Omniscience v1.1: non-hallucination | Artificial Analysis | – | 79.1%† |
| Instruction following | |||
| LiveBench Language | LiveBench | – | 82.9%† |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | LiveBench | – | 73.0%† |
| Arena Instruction Following | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1500† |
| Human preference | |||
| Arena Text | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1512† |
| EQ-Bench 4 | EQ-Bench | – | 1325 |
| Arena Creative Writing | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1494† |
| Arena Multi-turn | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1523† |
| Arena Longer Queries | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1510† |
| Multimodal | |||
| LiveBench Design | LiveBench | – | 70.9% |
| MMMU-Pro | Artificial Analysis | – | 83.8%† |
| Code2Video-AA | Artificial Analysis | – | 997† |
| Long context | |||
| AA-LCR v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 80.7%† |
| MLCR | Artificial Analysis | – | 22.2%† |
| Composite | |||
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | – | 162.0 |
| LiveBench 2.0 | LiveBench | – | 70.7% |
| LiveBench 1.0 | LiveBench | – | 81.2%† |
| AA Intelligence Index v5.0 | Artificial Analysis | – | 43.6† |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | Artificial Analysis | – | 52.4† |
| AA Progress Index v1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 335.8† |
| Vals Index | Vals AI | – | 64.9† |
| Vals Finance Index | Vals AI | – | 61.2%† |
| Vals Science Index | Vals AI | – | 39.1%† |
| Vals Router Index | Vals AI | – | 64.9% |
Data as of 2026-11-09. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
DuelLab GameBench 2, release gb2-20261103-eaea31df94e6 (https://benchmarks.duellab.org/releases/gb2-20261103-eaea31df94e6/), CC BY 4.0 (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/). Scores mapped to BenchLeader model names; not endorsed by DuelLab.
What changed
- Muse Wonder: BenchLeader Index 64.3 → 63.5.
- Muse Wonder: 5 score revisions.
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max): first results.
- Muse Wonder: 1 score revision.
- Muse Wonder: 1 new result (Startrise Frontend).
- Muse Wonder: 3 score revisions.
- Muse Wonder: 1 new result (EQ-Bench 4).
- Muse Wonder: 1 new result (Vals Router Index).
- Muse Wonder: 1 new result (Epoch Capabilities Index).
- Muse Wonder: 10 new results (LMCA, DTBench, LiveBench 2.0…).
Related comparisons
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together vs Claude Fable 5.2
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Muse Wonder vs Claude Fable 5.2
- Muse Wonder vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Muse Wonder vs Gemini 4 Carbon
- Muse Wonder vs GPT-6 Astra
- Kimi K3 vs Muse Wonder
Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs
Kimi K3.1 Pro Together vs Muse Wonder: questions
- Is Kimi K3.1 Pro Together better than Muse Wonder?
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together (max) and Muse Wonder are neck and neck on quality (60.5 vs 63.5, within the ±6.1 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 9 Nov 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
- When was Kimi K3.1 Pro Together released?
- Kimi K3.1 Pro Together was released on 23 Oct 2026.