Roboflow

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Muse Ember

Muse Ember: 76.6% average across five Vision Evals tasks (#16 of 67 models). We have not run Claude Haiku 4.5 through Roboflow's Vision Evals, so there is no head-to-head score.

Compare Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Muse Ember live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Muse Ember Comparison Table

Evals updated November 10, 2026Pricing updated November 10, 2026

PropertyClaude Haiku 4.5Muse Ember
OrganizationAnthropicMeta
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateOct 2025Nov 2026
Context Window200K1.0M
ParametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.00$0.100
Output $/1M$5.00$0.500
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoSupported
ClassificationDemoSupported
Object DetectionDemoSupported
OCRDemoSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoSupported
Both support 5 more tasks
Model Features
Both support 3 more features
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
OverallNot evaluated
76.6%
Avg cost / sample–$0.0009
Avg speed / sample–6.08s
By task
Object Detection (low)–
63.8%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.3 to 64.3
$0.0011
Object Detection (high)–
64.0%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.5 to 64.5
$0.0017
Counting (low)–
79.7%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.0006
Counting (high)–
79.3%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7
$0.0011
Identification (low)–
91.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0004
Identification (high)–
90.6%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8
$0.0007
OCR (low)–
69.5%
$0.0010
by category
Single value
61.7%
Transcription
95.5%
Structured JSON
85.1%
Text localization
35.3%
OCR (high)–
70.5%
$0.0017
by category
Single value
63.0%
Transcription
90.2%
Structured JSON
87.2%
Text localization
35.9%
Reasoning (low)–
78.2%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.8 to 79.5
$0.0006
Reasoning (high)–
81.9%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.1 to 83.4
$0.0013

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Muse Ember: Overview

Claude Haiku 4.5

Claude Haiku 4.5 is Anthropic’s lightweight model in the Claude 4.5 series, released in October 2025 under a proprietary license. Designed for speed and cost efficiency, it delivers near-frontier performance while maintaining Anthropic’s AI Safety Level 2 standard. Haiku 4.5 supports both text and multimodal (text and image) inputs, integrates tool use and extended reasoning, and features a 200,000 token context window, making it adept at handling long or complex workflows. Haiku 4.5 is ideal for developers and researchers seeking rapid, cost-effective model calls for analysis, coding, or multimodal understanding.

Muse Ember

Muse Ember is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Meta, released on November 9, 2026. It accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents and returns text. The Meta Model API serves it as muse-ember-1.0, with a 1,048,576-token context window and up to 524,288 output tokens. Reasoning effort is adjustable from minimal to max.

Meta positions Ember for repeated tasks within larger agent workflows: tool calls, routing, coding subtasks, and processing collections of images and documents. It can caption or sort photos and extract fields from records while a larger Muse model handles planning. Meta recommends Spark or Wonder for harder single-shot coding and knowledge-heavy problems. Ember is available as a hosted model; its weights are not publicly released.