Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Muse Wonder Full
Full profiles: Kimi K3.1 Pro (Moonshot AI) and Muse Wonder Full (Meta): every benchmark, price and rank.
Updated · Data from 6 sources
As of 25 Oct 2026, Kimi K3.1 Pro and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (66.9 vs 70.6, inside the ±10.7 margin of error) and close on price, so pick on the category that matters to you. Pick Kimi K3.1 Pro for knowledge (75 vs 71); pick Muse Wonder Full for reasoning (95 vs 81).
Kimi K3.1 Pro benchmarks Moonshot AI
Muse Wonder Full benchmarks max MetaOpen in the comparison toolWhich 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 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | Muse Wonder Full | 95 vs 81 category score; CritPt 32.9% vs 24.6% | High |
| Knowledge | Kimi K3.1 Pro | 75 vs 71 category score; AA-Omniscience 29.5 vs 30.1 | Medium |
| Long documents | Kimi K3.1 Pro | 68 vs 67 category score; AA-LCR 86.3% vs 83.7% | Medium |
| 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 and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (66.9 vs 70.6, within the ±10.7 margin).
- Kimi K3.1 Pro is stronger in agents & tools, knowledge, long context, multimodal.
- Muse Wonder Full (max) is stronger in composite, reasoning, coding.
At a glance
| Spec | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Muse Wonder Full |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Moonshot AI | Meta |
| Released | 23 Oct 2026 | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Context window (tokens) | 1,048,576 | 1,000,000 |
| Compared at | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Muse Wonder Full (max) |
| Open weights | No | No |
| Price in / out / cached input per 1M | $2.00 / $10.00 / $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 | Muse Wonder Full (max) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 81.3 | 94.9 | Muse Wonder Full |
| Coding | – | 72.1 | not comparable |
| Agents & tools | 68.0 | – | not comparable |
| Knowledge | 74.8 | 71.4 | Kimi K3.1 Pro |
| Multimodal | 67.0 | – | not comparable |
| Long context | 68.3 | 67.0 | Kimi K3.1 Pro |
| Composite | 75.8 | 91.9 | Muse Wonder Full |
Where sources disagree
Across the 14 benchmarks both have, Kimi K3.1 Pro leads 5, Muse Wonder Full leads 9. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Wonder Full ahead.
| Overall index | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Muse Wonder Full (max) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 66.9 | 70.6 | neck and neck |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 55.1 | 55.8 | Muse Wonder Full |
| Vals Index | 62.5† | 66.8 | Muse Wonder Full |
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; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.
| Measure | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Muse Wonder Full (max) |
|---|---|---|
| Blended price per 1M tokens | $4.00 | – |
| Input / output per 1M | $2.00 / $10.00 | – / – |
| Cached input per 1M | $0.200 | – |
| Price per task: chat reply | $0.0038 | – |
| Price per task: summarize a 30-page report | $0.030 | – |
| Price per task: code edit | $0.027 | – |
| Price per task: agentic coding session | $0.160 | – |
| Price per task: structured extraction | $0.0060 | – |
| Cost to run a full benchmark suite | $2.11 | – |
| Output speed | 73 tok/s | – |
| Time to first answer | 30.2 s | – |
| Time to a complete answer | 37.0 s | – |
Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 66.9 and takes 30 s to its first answer token. Muse Wonder Full (max) scores 70.6. 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
63 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 | Muse Wonder Full (max) |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | BenchLeader | 66.9 | 70.6 |
| Agents & tools score | BenchLeader | 68.0 | – |
| Composite score | BenchLeader | 75.8 | 91.9 |
| Knowledge score | BenchLeader | 74.8 | 71.4 |
| Long context score | BenchLeader | 68.3 | 67.0 |
| Multimodal score | BenchLeader | 67.0 | – |
| Reasoning score | BenchLeader | 81.3 | 94.9 |
| Coding score | BenchLeader | – | 72.1 |
| Blended price $/M | BenchLeader | $4.00 | – |
| Output speed | BenchLeader | 73 tok/s | – |
| Time to first answer | BenchLeader | 30.2 s | – |
| Context window | BenchLeader | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Reasoning | |||
| LiveBench 2.0 Reasoning | LiveBench | 91.1% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 52.5% | 53.6% |
| CritPt | Artificial Analysis | 24.6% | 32.9% |
| MysteryMechanism | Vals AI | – | 35.1% |
| Coding | |||
| Arena WebDev | Arena (LMArena) | 1692† | 1726 |
| LiveBench 2.0 Coding | LiveBench | 81.8% | – |
| SciCode (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 60.8% | 62.6% |
| IOI | Vals AI | – | 79.8% |
| Code Migration | Vals AI | – | 61.0% |
| Code Migration v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 62.8% |
| ProgramBench | Vals AI | – | 0.5% |
| SWE-bench Multimodal | Vals AI | – | 47.3% |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 | Vals AI | – | 34.0% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | 84.9%† | 86.0% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 67.2% | 57.1% |
| FrontierCode 1.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 47.1% | 44.9% |
| Agents & tools | |||
| LiveBench Long Agentic | LiveBench | 49.5% | – |
| LiveBench Browser | LiveBench | 80.0% | – |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | Artificial Analysis | 67.3% | 67.8% |
| Analyst Agent (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 38.8% | – |
| CyberBench | Vals AI | – | 73.6% |
| Finance Agent v2 | Vals AI | – | 59.1% |
| Finance Agent v2.1 | Vals AI | 61.5%† | 67.6% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | 11.7%† | 23.3% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1 | Vals AI | – | 21.7% |
Show all 63 benchmarks
| Metric | Publisher | Kimi K3.1 Pro | Muse Wonder Full (max) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Agents & tools | |||
| Legal Research Bench | Vals AI | 37.5%† | 53.4% |
| Robo-bench | Vals AI | – | 10.4% |
| SREBench | Vals AI | – | 11.8% |
| Tax Agent Bench | Vals AI | 24.9%† | 43.0% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | Vals AI | 63.6%† | 58.1% |
| Terminal-Bench Science | Vals AI | – | 37.1% |
| AutomationBench | Artificial Analysis | 73.3% | 71.3% |
| GDP.pdf (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 31.4% | 32.6% |
| Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 | Harvey | – | 13.1% |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | 1678 | 1729 |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 34.3% | 37.1% |
| CWE-Bench (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 60.8% | – |
| DeepSec-Bench (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 36.7% | – |
| CyberGym end-to-end (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 94.7% | – |
| Knowledge | |||
| LiveBench 2.0 Data Analysis | LiveBench | 79.1% | – |
| LiveBench Research | LiveBench | 77.9% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | Artificial Analysis | 29.5 | 30.1 |
| LegalBench | Vals AI | – | 87.4% |
| BioMysteryBench | Vals AI | – | 73.3% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | Vals AI | – | 71.9% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | 70.0%† | 75.0% |
| MedCode | Vals AI | – | 49.9% |
| MedScribe | Vals AI | – | 89.3% |
| Public Benefits Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 73.8% |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | Artificial Analysis | 51.0% | 43.2% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | Artificial Analysis | 56.1% | 77.0% |
| Multimodal | |||
| LiveBench Design | LiveBench | 77.8% | – |
| MMMU-Pro | Artificial Analysis | 83.9% | – |
| AA-3D | Artificial Analysis | 1110 | – |
| Long context | |||
| AA-LCR | Artificial Analysis | 86.3% | 83.7% |
| Composite | |||
| LiveBench 2.0 | LiveBench | 76.7% | – |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | Artificial Analysis | 55.1 | 55.8 |
| Vals Index | Vals AI | 62.5† | 66.8 |
| Vals Finance Index | Vals AI | 56.0%† | 64.5% |
| Vals RSI Index | Vals AI | – | 24.4% |
| Vals Science Index | Vals AI | – | 48.5% |
| Vals Router Index | Vals AI | – | 66.8%† |
| AA Cyber Index | Artificial Analysis | 64.1 | – |
Data as of 2026-10-25. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
What changed
- Kimi K3.1 Pro: 3 new results (Analyst Agent (AA), Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA), AA-3D).
- Kimi K3.1 Pro: BenchLeader Index 65.6 → 66.8.
- Kimi K3.1 Pro: 5 new results (FrontierCode 1.1 (AA), AA Cyber Index, CWE-Bench (AA)…).
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)).
- Kimi K3.1 Pro: first results.
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 9 new results (Code Migration v1.1, Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1, Finance Agent v2.1…).
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)).
- Muse Wonder Full (max): BenchLeader Index 68.6 → 70.7.
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (Arena WebDev); 2 score revisions.
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 21 new results (IOI, LegalBench, Vals Index…).
Related comparisons
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Gemini 4 Argon
- Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Claude Fable 5.1
- Muse Wonder Full vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Muse Wonder Full vs Gemini 4 Argon
- Muse Wonder Full vs Claude Fable 5.1
- Muse Wonder Full vs GPT-6 Astra
- Kimi K3 vs Muse Wonder Full
Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for coding · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs
Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Muse Wonder Full: questions
- Is Kimi K3.1 Pro better than Muse Wonder Full?
- Kimi K3.1 Pro and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (66.9 vs 70.6, within the ±10.7 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 2026-10-25, so check the category scores for your use.
- Which is better for long documents?
- Kimi K3.1 Pro scores higher on long-context benchmarks (68 vs 67). Both take about 1M tokens: Kimi K3.1 Pro 1,048,576, Muse Wonder Full 1,000,000.
- Do independent benchmarks agree on Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Muse Wonder Full?
- Across the 14 benchmarks both have, Kimi K3.1 Pro leads 5, Muse Wonder Full leads 9. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Wonder Full ahead.
- When was Kimi K3.1 Pro released?
- Kimi K3.1 Pro was released on 23 Oct 2026.