Roboflow

Kimi K3 vs Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder and Kimi K3 score 78.8% vs 56.0% averaged across five Vision Evals tasks (#10 and #45 of 65 models), so Muse Wonder leads overall.

  • Muse Wonder wins all 5 tasks, with its widest lead on reasoning (85.2% vs 42.4%).
  • Kimi K3 is about 1/7 of the cost: $0.0049 vs $0.034 overall average cost per sample.
  • Kimi K3 is faster: 9.9s vs 11.7s per sample.
MoonshotAI

Compare Kimi K3 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
MoonshotAIKimi K3
Run to compare this model.
MetaMuse Wonder
Run to compare this model.

Kimi K3 vs Muse Wonder on Vision Evals

Score by taskKimi K3Muse Wonder
Reasoning
42.4
85.2
Counting
46.0
76.6
OCR
58.6
74.3
Object Detection
51.9
65.1
Identification
81.3
92.7

Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.

Kimi K3 vs Muse Wonder Comparison Table

Evals updated October 26, 2026Pricing updated November 2, 2026

PropertyKimi K3Muse Wonder
OrganizationMoonshot AIMeta
Categoryopenclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Oct 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Parameters2.8Tundisclosed
LicenseModified MITProprietary
Commercial useSee license termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.192$4.00
Output $/1M$15.00$20.00
Vision Tasks
Both support 10 more tasks
Model Features
Both support 3 more features
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
56.0%
78.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0049$0.034
Avg speed / sample9.86s11.68s
By task
Object Detection (low)
51.9%
$0.0095
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)
46.0%
$0.0005
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)
81.3%
$0.0004
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)
58.6%
$0.0050
74.3%
$0.034
by category
Single value
43.0%
Transcription
75.1%
Structured JSON
78.1%
Text localization
39.3%
Single value
67.4%
Transcription
93.2%
Structured JSON
90.5%
Text localization
40.1%
OCR (high)
61.8%
$0.031
76.0%
$0.059
by category
Single value
43.9%
Transcription
80.4%
Structured JSON
82.9%
Text localization
43.4%
Single value
70.9%
Transcription
88.3%
Structured JSON
90.3%
Text localization
45.9%
Reasoning (low)
42.4%
$0.0004
85.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.8 to 85.4
$0.024
Reasoning (high)
74.2%
$0.033
83.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.1
$0.047

Kimi K3 vs Muse Wonder: Overview

Kimi K3

Kimi K3 is a sparse Mixture-of-Experts large language model developed by Moonshot AI, with 2.8 trillion total parameters and a 1-million-token context window. The model activates 16 out of 896 experts per token using the Stable LatentMoE framework, and is built on two architectural innovations: Kimi Delta Attention (KDA), a hybrid linear attention mechanism that enables up to 6.3x faster decoding in long-context settings, and Attention Residuals (AttnRes), which selectively retrieves representations across model depth and delivers roughly 25% higher training efficiency. Together with refined training and data recipes, these structural advances yield approximately 2.5x better overall scaling efficiency compared to its predecessor Kimi K2. The model applies quantization-aware training from the supervised fine-tuning stage onward, using MXFP4 weights with MXFP8 activations for hardware compatibility. Thinking mode is always enabled at launch, with reasoning effort configurable via the reasoning_effort field.

Kimi K3 supports native visual understanding alongside text, accepting image inputs for tasks that combine software engineering and visual reasoning. It targets long-horizon coding, knowledge work, and agentic workflows, and ships in two variants: K3 Max for general chat and agent tasks, and K3 Swarm Max for large-scale parallel processing across many coordinated sub-agents. The model is compatible with the OpenAI SDK via an OpenAI-compatible API. Full model weights are scheduled for release by July 27, 2026 under a Modified MIT license, following the open-weight pattern established by the Kimi K2 model family. A technical report with full architecture, training, and evaluation details is expected to accompany the weights release.

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.