Roboflow

Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder

Compare Claude Opus 5 and Muse Wonder side-by-side.

Compare Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder 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.

Models in this comparison

Anthropic

Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder on Vision Evals

Muse Wonder scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Muse Wonder leads 85.2% to 71.5%.

Overall, Claude Opus 5 averages 70.9% (#19 of 62) against 78.8% (#8 of 62) for Muse Wonder.

Claude Opus 5 is both cheaper ($0.020 vs $0.034 per sample) and faster (8.2s vs 11.7s per sample).

Claude Opus 5Muse Wonder

Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 13, 2026

PropertyClaude Opus 5Muse Wonder
OrganizationAnthropicMeta
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Oct 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknownundisclosed
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$5.00$4.00
Output $/1M$25.00$20.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoSupported
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoSupported
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoSupported
OCRDemoSupported
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoSupported
Image TaggingNot listedSupported
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
70.9%
78.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.020$0.034
Avg speed / sample8.21s11.68s
By task
Object Detection (low)
54.4%
$0.027
65.1%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.5 to 66.0
$0.044
Object Detection (high)–
66.0%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.5
$0.061
Counting (low)
70.3%
$0.0096
76.6%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 78.4
$0.024
Counting (high)–
79.7%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.043
Identification (low)
90.6%
$0.0072
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.014
Identification (high)–
90.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6
$0.023
OCR (low)
68.0%
$0.022
74.3%
$0.034
by category
Single value
56.1%
Transcription
92.7%
Structured JSON
85.2%
Text localization
40.5%
Single value
67.4%
Transcription
93.2%
Structured JSON
90.5%
Text localization
40.1%
OCR (high)
65.8%
$0.043
76.0%
$0.059
by category
Single value
47.8%
Transcription
85.2%
Structured JSON
88.7%
Text localization
42.6%
Single value
70.9%
Transcription
88.3%
Structured JSON
90.3%
Text localization
45.9%
Reasoning (low)
71.5%
$0.010
85.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.8 to 85.4
$0.024
Reasoning (high)
74.2%
$0.018
83.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.1
$0.047

Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder: Overview

Claude Opus 5

Claude Opus 5 is a large language model with multimodal vision capabilities developed by Anthropic, released on July 24, 2026 as the fourth model in the Claude 5 family. It sits in the Opus tier of Anthropic's lineup, positioned below the Mythos-class Fable 5 and Mythos 5 models, and is framed by Anthropic as the go-to model for most knowledge work and automation tasks. The model approaches Fable 5's capabilities at a lower cost. It becomes the default model on Claude Max and the strongest model available on Claude Pro. The model ships with a 1 million token context window and an adjustable "effort" parameter that allows users to trade reasoning depth for speed and token savings. Early enterprise customers reported that Opus 5 achieved comparable performance to Opus 4.8's maximum-reasoning mode while generating significantly fewer tokens on average, and demonstrated higher accuracy on financial modeling tasks with fewer tool calls and less time.

Claude Opus 5 supports multimodal inputs including images and text, and is designed for agentic workflows, coding, scientific research, and complex enterprise tasks. Anthropic reports the model scores 10.2 percentage points higher than Opus 4.8 on an internal chemistry benchmark, making it the most capable generally available model for scientific research in the Claude lineup. Cyber classifiers on Opus 5 are designed to intervene approximately 85 percent less often than those on Fable 5, with fallback to Opus 4.8 when a classifier triggers. The model does not retain user data for 30 days, unlike Fable 5. It is available across Anthropic's platforms including Claude Code and Claude Cowork, as well as cloud partners.

Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Meta, released on October 12, 2026 as the first step past the Muse Spark line on Meta's scaling ladder. It launched together with Muse Wonder Full, a larger configuration that is available only through Muse Code subscription plans, while Muse Wonder itself is served through the Meta Model API under the identifier muse-wonder-1.0. The model accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents as input and returns text, with a context window of 1,048,576 tokens and graded reasoning effort settings. Meta trained both models at its Prometheus data center on larger base models than Muse Spark 1.3, and attributes their gains on unfamiliar tasks to post-training that transfers more effectively from a stronger base.

Meta positions Muse Wonder for long-running personal and professional agents: it plans multi-step work, delegates to sub-agents, calls tools in parallel, recovers from errors, and operates browsers and desktop or mobile applications. Two training objectives shape this behaviour. Active Memory carries goals, constraints, and earlier decisions across conversations and retrieves the details relevant to the current step, and Active Focus keeps the model trying alternative approaches when a task gets difficult while asking for clarification before important actions. Visual inputs such as screenshots, charts, and video feed the same reasoning loop, and the model emits bounding box coordinates for grounding queries. Meta's model card lists visual and spatial reasoning, especially 3D tasks, as a known limitation and recommends validating performance for applications that depend on precise spatial understanding.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Muse Wonder performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 78.8% (#8 of 62) against 70.9% (#19 of 62) for Claude Opus 5. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Muse Wonder leads with 85.2% against 71.5%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Claude Opus 5 is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.020 per sample against $0.034. Claude Opus 5 is priced at $5.00 per 1M input tokens and $25.00 per 1M output; Muse Wonder is priced at $4.00 per 1M input tokens and $20.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Claude Opus 5 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.2s per inference against 11.7s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.