Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Muse Wonder

Gemini 2.5 Flash costs 8.0x less per output token than Muse Wonder ($2.50 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 35 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemini 2.5 FlashGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
34.3
Output $/M
$2.50
0
Muse WonderMeta
Coding
71.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$20.00
35
vs boards won of 35 shared

Gemini 2.5 Flash or Muse Wonder: which to pick

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash for output tokens 8.0x cheaper ($2.50 vs $20.00 per million).

Shared results
35
Gemini 2.5 Flash only
38
Muse Wonder only
25
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemini 2.5 Flash not benchmarked, Muse Wonder 71.9 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 55.5 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
Vending-Bench 2: Gemini 2.5 Flash $549 against Muse Wonder $9,432, 55.5 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemini 2.5 Flash $2.50 against Muse Wonder $20.00 per million output tokens, 8.0x apart.
Context window
Both take 1.05M tokens.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemini 2.5 FlashBarsMuse WonderTies
Coding02
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
Reasoning04
Math02
Knowledge04
Web design06
General015
All shared boards035
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
SWE-bench Verified28.7%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1652Only Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured49.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)Not measured83.1%Only Muse Wonder measured
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured62.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured66.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)Not measured45.6%Only Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)Not measured26.6%Only Muse Wonder measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.4%Only Muse Wonder measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)69.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
SciCodeNot measured60.3%Only Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)13.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Terminal-Bench17.1%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: coding14231522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT14251515Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1641Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1694Only Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 22 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
AA Intelligence Index15.5Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Epoch Capabilities Index142.9161.8Muse Wonder
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1243Only Muse Wonder measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured56.6%Only Muse Wonder measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)Not measured36.3%Only Muse Wonder measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured50.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured23.8%Only Muse Wonder measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured67.1%Only Muse Wonder measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)Not measured67.0%Only Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)Not measured22.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
Vals Science IndexNot measured39.1%Only Muse Wonder measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)Not measured7.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
τ²-Bench Telecom31.6%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
BALROG33.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Vending-Bench 2$549$9,432Muse Wonder
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)56.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
BrowseComp-Plus39.9%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured27.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)79.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)12.1%50.1%Muse Wonder
ARC-AGI33.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
ARC-AGI-22.5%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
SimpleBench41.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14221506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert14261513Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14201506Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision: diagrams1245Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: homework1244Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark56.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
AA Math Index73.3Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)73.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
ProofBenchNot measured84.0%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: math14111486Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: mathematical work14221514Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
MedCode (Vals AI)40.4%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)83.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: science14331506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14281512Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and government14301505Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: business and finance14041483Muse Wonder
FACTS Benchmark Suite47.2%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Web design benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
Design Arena: websites10741362Muse Wonder
Design Arena: UI components10021379Muse Wonder
Design Arena: game dev10041376Muse Wonder
Design Arena: data viz10601317Muse Wonder
Design Arena: 3D10201427Muse Wonder
Design Arena: all code categories10591371Muse Wonder
Design Arena: SVG1020Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index015
General benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
Vals IndexNot measured64.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured70.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
SAGE (Vals AI)44.8%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)83.0%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
IFBench50.3%Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)65.3%80.7%Muse Wonder
DTBench76.5%95.2%Muse Wonder
LMCA27.5%56.8%Muse Wonder
LMArena Text14171502Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following14051491Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing14001491Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision1235Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: English14181507Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English14091492Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese14491537Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: German1417Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1396Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Korean1385Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: French14321523Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Spanish1422Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: Russian14151522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Polish1413Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14081510Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries14191493Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language14051496Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13931482Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision: English1239Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1284Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1237Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: humor1225Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: captioning1277Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1252Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1241Not measuredOnly Gemini 2.5 Flash measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGemini 2.5 FlashMuse WonderLeader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.0015Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.014Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.022Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.260Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemini 2.5 Flash$0.085Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$1.00Fits in one request

Gemini 2.5 Flash costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of Gemini 2.5 Flash and Muse Wonder
SpecificationGoogle Gemini 2.5 FlashMeta Muse Wonder
MakerGoogleMeta
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedJune 17, 2025October 12, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.30$4.00
Output $/Mtok$2.50$20.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked71.9
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved task$0.466Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemini 2.5 Flash better than Muse Wonder for coding?

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Gemini 2.5 Flash has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash for output tokens 8.0x cheaper ($2.50 vs $20.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Muse Wonder?

Gemini 2.5 Flash costs $0.30 per million input tokens and $2.50 per million output tokens; Muse Wonder costs $4.00 and $20.00. Cost per solved task is known for Gemini 2.5 Flash only.

Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash or Muse Wonder?

Neither: both take 1.05M tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash vs Muse Wonder comparison based on?

35 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Flash's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Muse Wonder's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next