GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Wonder
Compare GPT-5.4 Mini and Muse Wonder side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Object Detection, Classification, Image Captioning, and OCR.
Compare GPT-5.4 Mini 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Wonder on Vision Evals
Muse Wonder scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Muse Wonder leads 65.1% to 15.8%.
Overall, GPT-5.4 Mini averages 53.2% (#50 of 62) against 78.8% (#8 of 62) for Muse Wonder.
GPT-5.4 Mini is both cheaper ($0.0034 vs $0.034 per sample) and faster (5.5s vs 11.7s per sample).
GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Wonder Comparison Table
Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 13, 2026
| Property | GPT-5.4 Mini | Muse Wonder |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | Meta |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| Context Window | 400K | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | undisclosed |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Commercial use | commercial use per vendor terms | commercial use per vendor terms |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.750 | $4.00 |
| Output $/1M | $4.50 | $20.00 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 53.2% | 78.8% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0034 | $0.034 |
| Avg speed / sample | 5.51s | 11.68s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 15.8% ±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 15.3 to 16.1 | 65.1% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.5 to 66.0 |
| Object Detection (high) | 16.6% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 15.8 to 17.4 | 66.0% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.5 |
| Counting (low) | 58.6% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 56.8 to 60.8 | 76.6% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 78.4 |
| Counting (high) | 64.9% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.5 to 67.6 | 79.7% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1 |
| Identification (low) | 83.3% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4 | 92.7% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8 |
| Identification (high) | 82.3% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 84.4 | 90.6% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6 |
| OCR (low) | 51.1% | 74.3% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 55.8% | 76.0% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 57.0% ±3.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.3 to 60.9 | 85.2% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.8 to 85.4 |
| Reasoning (high) | 64.0% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.9 to 65.6 | 83.4% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.1 |
GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Wonder: Overview
GPT-5.4 mini is a fast, cost-efficient model developed by OpenAI and released on March 17, 2026, optimized for high-throughput workloads and subagent orchestration. It supports text and image inputs within a 400,000-token context window, making it ideal for processing extensive visual datasets and large codebases in a single request. Designed for low-latency production environments, the model integrates with key API features including function calling, web search, and tool-based computer use, allowing it to assist in automated workflows that require navigating digital interfaces.
Compared to the previous GPT-5 mini, this version runs more than twice as fast while approaching the performance levels of the flagship GPT-5.4 on reasoning and coding benchmarks. While the larger GPT-5.4 introduces native, state-of-the-art computer-use capabilities, GPT-5.4 mini provides a scalable alternative for interpreting screenshots and reasoning over dense UI layouts. For vision tasks on Playground, it excels at extracting structured information from visual documents and assisting in agentic tasks that involve real-time interpretation of software interfaces alongside text.
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 53.2% (#50 of 62) for GPT-5.4 Mini. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, Muse Wonder leads with 65.1% against 15.8%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
GPT-5.4 Mini is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0034 per sample against $0.034. GPT-5.4 Mini is priced at $0.75 per 1M input tokens and $4.50 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.
GPT-5.4 Mini is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 5.5s 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 open prompts and object detection in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.