Claude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Wonder
Wins 0 of 5 areas
—
Wins 4 of 5 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Long documents
Muse Wonder is the stronger all-rounder.
Scores updated · 16 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the five areas where both have results. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own02Muse Wonder2 of 2 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking02Muse Wonder2 of 2 tests
- CodingWriting and fixing software01Muse Wonder1 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts01Muse Wonder1 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Coding and long documents rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Muse Wonder costs 20% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The tests each model wins by the widest margin, up to three each. Scores are out of 100.
Where Muse Wonder pulls ahead
- Complex command-line tasks across many fieldsTerminal-Bench 4.0+30.3points ahead
- Real work tasks from 44 professionsGDPVal+15.8points ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+12.8points ahead
Where Claude Opus 4.8 pulls ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+7.7points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 16 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
AgentsMuse Wonder
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Muse Wonder by 30.321.752+30.3
- GDPValMuse Wonder by 15.847.763.5+15.8
ReasoningMuse Wonder
- CritPtMuse Wonder by 7.420.928.3+7.4
- Humanity's Last ExamMuse Wonder by 1.448.750.1+1.4
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationMuse Wonder by 12.860.773.5+12.8
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Opus 4.8 by 7.748.841.1+7.7
Other results8 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- GDP (Surge AI)Claude Opus 4.8 by 5484.830.8+54
- SWE-MarathonMuse Wonder by 27.12653.1+27.1
- JobBenchMuse Wonder by 22.148.470.5+22.1
- Program BenchClaude Opus 4.8 by 21.971.950+21.9
- DeepSWE 1.1Muse Wonder by 19.85978.8+19.8
- AA IntelligenceMuse Wonder by 10.641.852.4+10.6
- HealthBench ProfessionalMuse Wonder by 4.755.860.5+4.7
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Opus 4.8 by 3.328.825.5+3.3
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Wonder?
Muse Wonder wins four of the five areas where both have results: coding, agents, reasoning and long documents. Claude Opus 4.8 wins none. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Muse Wonder. It wins the one coding test both models report.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Opus 4.8 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $25.00 per million output tokens; Muse Wonder costs $4.00 and $20.00. That makes Muse Wonder about 20% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 16 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 8 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 8 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.