The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Muse Ember vs o1

Muse Ember leads the LLM Stats Score 45.9 to 20.3. Muse Ember is 131.3x cheaper per token.

Meta · OpenAI · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Muse Ember leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.9 to 20.3, ranking #47 overall.

On price, Muse Ember is roughly 131.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Muse Ember 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 Muse Ember

  • overall performance matters — it scores 45.9 and ranks #47 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 131.3x cheaper per token
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026

Choose o1

  • you want predictable pricing at $15.00/M input and $60.00/M output

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Muse Ember
Meta
o1
OpenAI
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
45.9
#47
20.3
#237
Reasoning
48.1
#24
20.6
#224
Coding
27.3
#86
4.0
#251
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.10 / M
$15.00 / M
Output price
$0.50 / M
$60.00 / M
Context window
1,048,576
200,000

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Muse Ember
o1
Vision
23.4#78
12.1#127
Tool use
30.7#14
12.5#134
Multimodal
23.6#74
15.8#108
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

6 reported for Muse Ember · 19 for o1

No common benchmarks found

Muse Ember and o1don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Muse Ember costs less

For input processing, Muse Ember ($0.10/1M tokens) is 150.0x cheaper than o1 ($15.00/1M tokens).

For output processing, Muse Ember ($0.50/1M tokens) is 120.0x cheaper than o1 ($60.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, o1 is more expensive than Muse Ember.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Thu Nov 12 2026 • llm-stats.com
Meta
Muse Ember
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.50
Best providerMeta
OpenAI
o1
Input tokens$15.00
Output tokens$60.00
Best providerAzure
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Muse Ember accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to o1's 200,000 tokens. Muse Ember can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while o1 is limited to 100,000 tokens.

Meta
Muse Ember
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output524,288 tokens
OpenAI
o1
Input200,000 tokens
Output100,000 tokens
Thu Nov 12 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Muse Ember supports multimodal inputs, whereas o1 does not.

Muse Ember can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Muse Ember

Text
Images
Audio
Video

o1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Muse Ember

Proprietary

Closed source

o1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Muse Ember was released on 2026-11-09, while o1 was released on 2024-12-17.

Muse Ember is 23 months newer than o1.

Muse Ember

Nov 9, 2026

3 days ago

1.9yr newer
o1

Dec 17, 2024

1.9 years ago

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Muse Ember is available from Meta Model API. o1 is available from Azure, OpenAI.

Muse Ember

meta logo
Meta
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.50/1M

o1

azure logo
Azure
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $60.00/1M
openai logo
OpenAI
Input Price:Input: $15.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $60.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Muse Ember and o1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Muse Ember
✓ Preferred
o1
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Muse Ember vs o1.

Which is better, Muse Ember or o1?

Muse Ember leads the LLM Stats Score 45.9 to 20.3. Muse Ember is made by Meta and o1 is made by OpenAI. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Muse Ember compare to o1 in benchmarks?

Muse Ember scores PerceptionBench: 80.6%, OSWorld 2.1 (partial): 69.5%, Agents' Last Exam: 61.6%, Personal Superintelligence Index: 46.8%, Terminal-Bench 4.0: 40.9%. o1 scores GSM8k: 97.1%, MATH: 96.4%, GPQA Physics: 92.8%, MMLU: 91.8%, MGSM: 89.3%.

Is Muse Ember cheaper than o1?

Muse Ember is 150.0x cheaper for input tokens. Muse Ember costs $0.10/M input and $0.50/M output via meta. o1 costs $15.00/M input and $60.00/M output via azure.

What are the context window sizes for Muse Ember and o1?

Muse Ember supports 1.0M tokens and o1 supports 200K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Muse Ember and o1?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (45.9 vs 20.3), context window (1.0M vs 200K), input pricing ($0.10 vs $15.00/M), multimodal support (yes vs no). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Muse Ember and o1?

Muse Ember is developed by Meta and o1 is developed by OpenAI.

Related comparisons