Muse Wonder vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
As of 13 Oct 2026, Muse Wonder (max) leads on quality (66.3 vs 63.2 on the BenchLeader Index), but Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs 2.7× less, so it is the better buy unless you need the extra quality.
Muse Wonder 
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B Key differences
- Muse Wonder (max) leads on quality: 66.3 vs 63.2.
- Muse Wonder (max) is stronger in composite, knowledge, long context, reasoning.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is stronger in agents & tools.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 2.7× cheaper ($3.00 vs $8.00 per 1M blended).
- Muse Wonder (max) streams 2.2× faster (85 vs 39 tokens per second).
Choose Muse Wonder (max) if
- reasoning is the priority (88 vs 74 on the category score)
- knowledge is the priority (73 vs 64 on the category score)
- you need fast output: 85 against 39 tokens per second
Choose Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B if
- cost matters: $3.00 against $8.00 per million tokens blended
- you want to run it yourself: its weights are open
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 | Muse Wonder (max) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 87.8 | 74.1 | Muse Wonder |
| Agents & tools | – | 78.5 | not comparable |
| Knowledge | 73.0 | 63.5 | Muse Wonder |
| Long context | 65.5 | 65.3 | level |
| Composite | 78.2 | 74.4 | 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 | Muse Wonder (max) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
|---|---|---|
| Blended price per 1M tokens | $8.00 | $3.00 |
| Input / output per 1M | $4.00 / $20.00 | $2.00 / $6.00 |
| Price per task: chat reply | $0.0076 | $0.0026 |
| Price per task: summarise a 30-page report | $0.060 | $0.028 |
| Price per task: code edit | $0.054 | $0.021 |
| Price per task: agentic coding session | $0.320 | $0.144 |
| Price per task: structured extraction | $0.012 | $0.0052 |
| Cost to run a full benchmark suite | $4.52 | $2.16 |
| Output speed | 85 tok/s | 39 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 60.8 s | 53.9 s |
| Time to a complete answer | 66.7 s | 66.6 s |
Every benchmark
| Metric | Muse Wonder (max) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 66.3 | 63.2 |
| Composite score | 78.2 | 74.4 |
| Knowledge score | 73.0 | 63.5 |
| Long context score | 65.5 | 65.3 |
| Reasoning score | 87.8 | 74.1 |
| Agents & tools score | – | 78.5 |
| Blended price $/M | $8.00 | $3.00 |
| Output speed | 85 tok/s | 39 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 60.8 s | 53.9 s |
| Context window | 1.0M | 1M |
| LiveBench | 81.2% | – |
| LiveBench Reasoning | 90.6% | – |
| LiveBench Coding | 80.7% | – |
| LiveBench Agentic Coding | 62.7% | – |
| LiveBench Mathematics | 96.5% | – |
| LiveBench Data Analysis | 81.6% | – |
| LiveBench Language | 82.9% | – |
| LiveBench Instruction Following | 73.0% | – |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 52.4 | 39.9 |
| AA-LCR | 80.7% | 80.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | 25.5 | 4.3 |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 93.5% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 50.1% | 42.5% |
| SciCode (AA) | 60.3% | 54.0% |
| CritPt | 28.3% | 20.0% |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | 63.5% | 55.5% |
| τ³-Banking (AA) | – | 49.1% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | 52.0% | 11.1% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA) | – | 82.0% |
| AutomationBench | 68.1% | – |
| GDP.pdf | 30.6% | – |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | 41.1% | 31.3% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | 73.5% | 60.8% |
| 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.
Muse Wonder vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: questions
- Is Muse Wonder better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Muse Wonder (max) leads on quality: 66.3 vs 63.2. 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, Muse Wonder or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is cheaper: $3.00 against $8.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Muse Wonder or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Muse Wonder streams faster: 85 against 39 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Muse Wonder accepts more context: 1.0M against 1M tokens.