Model comparison
Selected 2 / 5See the differences. Choose what matters to you.
Available modelsSelected 2 / 5
Differences vs. muse-wonder · max
Score, cost & time differences
Current baseline · muse-wonder · max
90Knowledge & Reasoning
Compared with muse-wonder · max
- claude-opus-4-8 · xhigh
Knowledge & Reasoning: tiedReference cost $2.20 ($1.17 less)Evaluation time 40m 31s (21m 29s more)
Differences reflect these evaluation tasks. Cost and time cover the same dimension, not a typical conversation. Scoring & cost notes
| Metric | muse-wonder · max | claude-opus-4-8 · xhigh |
|---|---|---|
| Knowledge & Reasoning | muse-wondermax 90 | claude-opus-4-8xhigh 90Tied |
| Overall | muse-wondermax 81.55 | claude-opus-4-8xhigh 76.80−4.75 pts |
| Backend engineering | muse-wondermax 82 | claude-opus-4-8xhigh 61−21 pts |
| Frontend interaction | muse-wondermax 84 | claude-opus-4-8xhigh 87+3 pts |
| Visual aesthetics | muse-wondermax 73 | claude-opus-4-8xhigh 68−5 pts |
| Maintainability | muse-wondermax 59 | claude-opus-4-8xhigh 55−4 pts |
Knowledge & Reasoning evaluation · Evaluation consumption, not a monthly subscription fee
Cost & time
Knowledge & Reasoning evaluation| Metric | muse-wonder · max | claude-opus-4-8 · xhigh |
|---|---|---|
| Reference cost | muse-wondermax $3.37 | claude-opus-4-8xhigh $2.20−$1.17 |
| Evaluation time | muse-wondermax 19m 2s | claude-opus-4-8xhigh 40m 31s+112.9% |
Capability profiles
Show up to five models. Select names to focus the chart.
Behind each score
Expand to inspect each subaxis.
Backend engineeringSubscores
| Scoring dimension | muse-wondermax | claude-opus-4-8xhigh |
|---|---|---|
| Contracts and boundaries | 18 / 20 | 7 / 20 |
| Retries and failures | 19 / 20 | 16 / 20 |
| CI and adversarial review | 12 / 20 | 11 / 20 |
| Transactions and consistency | 18 / 20 | 15 / 20 |
| Caching and regression | 15 / 20 | 12 / 20 |
Frontend interactionSubscores
| Scoring dimension | muse-wondermax | claude-opus-4-8xhigh |
|---|---|---|
| Layout and adaptation | 18 / 20 | 20 / 20 |
| Interaction behavior | 20 / 20 | 20 / 20 |
| State continuity | 10 / 20 | 20 / 20 |
| Accessibility and feedback | 13 / 15 | 12 / 15 |
| State validation and regression | 23 / 25 | 15 / 25 |
Knowledge & ReasoningSubscores
| Scoring dimension | muse-wondermax | claude-opus-4-8xhigh |
|---|---|---|
| Mathematical reasoning | 15 / 15 | 15 / 15 |
| Computer science & AI | 15 / 15 | 10 / 15 |
| Science and engineering | 10 / 10 | 10 / 10 |
| Life sciences and medicine | 15 / 20 | 20 / 20 |
| Humanities and general knowledge | 35 / 40 | 35 / 40 |
Visual aestheticsSubscores
| Scoring dimension | muse-wondermax | claude-opus-4-8xhigh |
|---|---|---|
| Composition | 19 / 20 | 20 / 20 |
| Spacing and alignment | 17 / 20 | 16 / 20 |
| Typography and expression | 18 / 20 | 17 / 20 |
| Color and surfaces | 19 / 20 | 19 / 20 |
| Control styling | 17 / 20 | 16 / 20 |
Subscores retain their original scale; the axis score uses a consistent conversion.
MaintainabilitySubscores
| Scoring dimension | muse-wondermax | claude-opus-4-8xhigh |
|---|---|---|
| Semantic clarity | 15 / 20 | 15 / 20 |
| Control-flow organization | 20 / 20 | 19 / 20 |
| Locality of changes | 15 / 20 | 15 / 20 |
| State and lifecycle | 17 / 20 | 16 / 20 |
| Implementation economy | 17 / 20 | 17 / 20 |
Subscores retain their original scale; the axis score uses a consistent conversion.