Roboflow

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Muse Wonder

Compare Gemini 2.5 Pro and Muse Wonder side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Object Detection, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Image Captioning.

Compare Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Muse Wonder live

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

Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
GoogleGemini 2.5 Pro
Run to compare this model.
MetaMuse Wonder
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Muse Wonder on Vision Evals

Muse Wonder scores higher on 4 of the five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Muse Wonder leads 85.2% to 42.4%.

Overall, Gemini 2.5 Pro averages 57.6% (#39 of 62) against 78.8% (#8 of 62) for Muse Wonder.

Gemini 2.5 Pro is both cheaper ($0.0051 vs $0.034 per sample) and faster (6.8s vs 11.7s per sample).

Gemini 2.5 ProMuse Wonder

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Muse Wonder Comparison Table

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

PropertyGemini 2.5 ProMuse Wonder
OrganizationGoogleMeta
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJun 2025Oct 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknownundisclosed
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.25$4.00
Output $/1M$10.00$20.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
57.6%
78.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0051$0.034
Avg speed / sample6.83s11.68s
By task
Object Detection (low)
33.7%
$0.010
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)
52.7%
$0.0012
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)
93.8%
$0.0012
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)
65.2%
$0.0046
74.3%
$0.034
by category
Single value
60.9%
Transcription
86.8%
Structured JSON
76.3%
Text localization
35.9%
Single value
67.4%
Transcription
93.2%
Structured JSON
90.5%
Text localization
40.1%
OCR (high)
64.6%
$0.025
76.0%
$0.059
by category
Single value
63.0%
Transcription
87.3%
Structured JSON
78.3%
Text localization
20.6%
Single value
70.9%
Transcription
88.3%
Structured JSON
90.3%
Text localization
45.9%
Reasoning (low)
42.4%
$0.0013
85.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.8 to 85.4
$0.024
Reasoning (high)
62.3%
$0.011
83.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.1
$0.047

Gemini 2.5 Pro vs Muse Wonder: Overview

Gemini 2.5 Pro

Gemini 2.5 Pro, released on June 17, 2025, is Google DeepMind’s most capable model in the Gemini 2.5 family, optimized for deep reasoning, coding, and complex multimodal tasks. It accepts text, images, audio, video, and PDFs as input and outputs text. The model supports 1 million input tokens with an output capacity of up to 65K tokens, enabling large-scale comprehension of datasets, codebases, and technical documents. Its training knowledge extends to January 2025.

Pro outperforms earlier Gemini 2.0 models across benchmarks, including agentic coding tasks where it achieved ~63.8% on SWE-Bench Verified. It supports structured outputs, function calling, code execution, search grounding, and URL context, making it well-suited for enterprise, STEM, and developer workflows. However, it does not currently support image or audio generation in its stable release, and its higher computational cost and latency make it less efficient than Flash or Flash-Lite. It is available via the Gemini API, Google AI Studio, and Vertex AI.

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 4 of the five vision tasks and averages 78.8% (#8 of 62) against 57.6% (#39 of 62) for Gemini 2.5 Pro. 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 42.4%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Gemini 2.5 Pro is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0051 per sample against $0.034. Gemini 2.5 Pro is priced at $1.25 per 1M input tokens and $10.00 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.

Gemini 2.5 Pro is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 6.8s per inference against 11.7s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.

Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for object detection and open prompts in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.