Roboflow

Muse Ember vs SAM 3

Muse Ember: 76.6% average across five Vision Evals tasks (#16 of 67 models). We have not run SAM 3 through Roboflow's Vision Evals, so there is no head-to-head score.

Meta

Compare Muse Ember vs SAM 3 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.

Muse Ember vs SAM 3 Comparison Table

Evals updated November 10, 2026Pricing updated November 10, 2026

PropertyMuse EmberSAM 3
OrganizationMetaMeta
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateNov 2026Nov 2025
Context Window1.0M—
ParametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseProprietaryCustom
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termsSee license terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$0.100No published price
Output $/1M$0.500No published price
Vision Tasks
Object DetectionSupportedDemo
CaptioningSupportedNot listed
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedNot listed
ClassificationSupportedNot listed
Document Question AnsweringSupportedNot listed
Image TaggingSupportedNot listed
Instance SegmentationNot listedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedNot listed
OCRSupportedNot listed
Open Vocabulary Object DetectionNot listedSupported
Promptable Concept SegmentationNot listedDemo
Video Object TrackingNot listedSupported
Vision LanguageSupportedNot listed
Visual Question AnsweringSupportedNot listed
Zero Shot SegmentationNot listedSupported
Model Features
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedNot listed
Zero-shot DetectionNot listedSupported
Both support 2 more features
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
76.6%
Not evaluated
Avg cost / sample$0.0009–
Avg speed / sample6.08s–
By task
Object Detection (low)
63.8%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.3 to 64.3
$0.0011
–
Object Detection (high)
64.0%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 63.5 to 64.5
$0.0017
–
Counting (low)
79.7%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.0006
–
Counting (high)
79.3%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 79.7
$0.0011
–
Identification (low)
91.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0004
–
Identification (high)
90.6%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8
$0.0007
–
OCR (low)
69.5%
$0.0010
–
by category
Single value
61.7%
Transcription
95.5%
Structured JSON
85.1%
Text localization
35.3%
OCR (high)
70.5%
$0.0017
–
by category
Single value
63.0%
Transcription
90.2%
Structured JSON
87.2%
Text localization
35.9%
Reasoning (low)
78.2%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.8 to 79.5
$0.0006
–
Reasoning (high)
81.9%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.1 to 83.4
$0.0013
–

Muse Ember vs SAM 3: Overview

Muse Ember

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.

SAM 3

Released on November 19th, 2025, Segment Anything 3 (SAM 3) is a zero-shot image segmentation model that “detects, segments, and tracks objects in images and videos based on concept prompts.” This model was developed by Meta as the third model in the Segment Anything series.

Unlike its previous SAM models (Segment Anything and Segment Anything 2), you can provide SAM 3 with the prompt “shipping container” and it will generate precise segmentation masks for all shipping containers in an image. SAM 3 generates segmentation masks that correspond to the location of the objects found with a text prompt.