Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder
Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the LLM Stats Score 58.7 to 47.9. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is 2.0x cheaper per token.
Anthropic · Meta · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 58.7 to 47.9, ranking #2 overall.
In the 5 individual benchmarks reported for both models, Claude Sonnet 5.5 wins 4; this is a narrower head-to-head signal than the composite indexes.
On price, Claude Sonnet 5.5 is roughly 2.0x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Muse Wonder also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Claude Sonnet 5.5
- overall performance matters — it scores 58.7 and ranks #2 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and agents — it leads those capability indexes
- you value its reported benchmark strengths — it wins 4 of 5 exact shared results
- cost matters — it's about 2.0x cheaper per token
Choose Muse Wonder
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Oct 2026
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
47 reported for Claude Sonnet 5.5 · 16 for Muse Wonder
Claude Sonnet 5.5 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (HealthBench Professional, OSWorld 2.1 (partial), OSWorld 2.1 (strict), Program Bench), while Muse Wonder is better at 1 benchmark (DeepSWE 1.1).
Claude Sonnet 5.5 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($2.00/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Muse Wonder ($4.00/1M tokens).
For output processing, Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($10.00/1M tokens) is 2.0x cheaper than Muse Wonder ($20.00/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Muse Wonder is more expensive than Claude Sonnet 5.5.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Muse Wonder accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude Sonnet 5.5's 1,000,000 tokens. Only Claude Sonnet 5.5 specifies output context (128,000 tokens).
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Both Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Wonder support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Muse Wonder
License
Usage and distribution terms
Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.
Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.
Proprietary
Closed source
Proprietary
Closed source
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Claude Sonnet 5.5 was released on 2026-09-28, while Muse Wonder was released on 2026-10-12.
Muse Wonder is 0 month newer than Claude Sonnet 5.5.
Sep 28, 2026
2 weeks ago
Oct 12, 2026
0 days ago
2w newerKnowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Claude Sonnet 5.5 has a documented knowledge cutoff of 2026-06-01, while Muse Wonder's cutoff date is not specified.
We can confirm Claude Sonnet 5.5's training data extends to 2026-06-01, but cannot make a direct comparison without Muse Wonder's cutoff date.
Jun 2026
—
Provider Availability
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is available from Anthropic. Muse Wonder is available from Meta Model API.
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Muse Wonder
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Wonder side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder.