Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Muse Ember
Muse Ember: 76.6% average across five Vision Evals tasks (#16 of 67 models). We have not run Claude Sonnet 4.5 through Roboflow's Vision Evals, so there is no head-to-head score.
Compare Claude Sonnet 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 Sonnet 4.5 vs Muse Ember Comparison Table
Evals updated November 10, 2026Pricing updated November 10, 2026
| Property | Claude Sonnet 4.5 | Muse Ember |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Anthropic | Meta |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Sep 2025 | Nov 2026 |
| Context Window | 200K | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | commercial use per vendor terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $3.00 | $0.100 |
| Output $/1M | $15.00 | $0.500 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Supported |
| OCR | Demo | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Supported |
| Model Features | ||
Both support 3 more features | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | Not 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 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 64.0% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.5 to 64.5 |
| Counting (low) | – | 79.7% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1 |
| Counting (high) | – | 79.3% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7 |
| Identification (low) | – | 91.7% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8 |
| Identification (high) | – | 90.6% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8 |
| OCR (low) | – | 69.5% |
| by category |
| |
| OCR (high) | – | 70.5% |
| by category |
| |
| Reasoning (low) | – | 78.2% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.8 to 79.5 |
| Reasoning (high) | – | 81.9% ±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.1 to 83.4 |
Claude Sonnet 4.5 vs Muse Ember: Overview
Claude Sonnet 4.5, released by Anthropic in September 2025, is the company’s most advanced Sonnet-series model, built for high-performance reasoning, coding, and long-horizon agentic workflows. It is a multimodal system that accepts both text and images, with a 200,000-token context window designed for handling large documents and extended interactions. Anthropic highlights its improvements in reliability, reduced sycophancy, and alignment, making it suitable for sustained enterprise use.
It introduces infrastructure features such as a memory tool (beta), checkpointing for Claude Code, parallel tool use, and tighter integration with VS Code. Compared to Opus, which targets broader reasoning, Sonnet 4.5 is optimized for structured, long-duration tasks. Positioned against leading offerings from OpenAI and Google, it is aimed at enterprise automation, software engineering, and research-intensive applications.
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.