Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GLM 4.6 vs Muse Wonder

Updated October 21, 2026. 34 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Replace GLM 4.6 Replace Muse Wonder
GLM 4.6Z.ai
Coding
52.2
Overall
18.5
Output $/M
$2.20
0
Muse WonderMeta
Coding
64.5
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$20.00
34
vs boards won of 34 shared

Decision reading

Pick Muse Wonder for coding: it scores 64.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 52.2 for GLM 4.6, though on 1 benchmark against 2.

Pick GLM 4.6 when output tokens cost 9.1x less.

Model AGLM 4.6Z.ai52.2/1002 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved taskModel BMuse WonderMeta64.5/1001 independent benchmarkNo cost per solved task
Shared results
34
GLM 4.6 only
32
Muse Wonder only
26
Like-for-like categories
6 of 9

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results only one model has describe coverage, not superiority.

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
GLM 4.6 52.2 from 2 benchmarks, Muse Wonder 64.5 from 1 benchmark.
Widest category
Coding, 37.6 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GLM 4.6 3.1% against Muse Wonder 83.1%, 80.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GLM 4.6 $2.20 against Muse Wonder $20.00 per million output tokens, 9.1x apart.
Context window
GLM 4.6 takes 205K tokens, Muse Wonder 1.05M.

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
CategoryGLM 4.6BarsMuse WonderTies
Coding05
Reasoning04
Math02
Knowledge04
Web design06
General013
All shared boards034
CodingLike-for-likeFour of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index05
Coding benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse WonderLeader
SWE-bench Verified68.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena WebDev13411652Muse Wonder
AA Coding Index45.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)81.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured49.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)3.1%83.1%Muse Wonder
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 GLM 4.6 measured
SciCodeNot measured60.3%Only Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)28.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Terminal-Bench24.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
ALE-Bench340.8Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: coding14491522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT14551515Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1641Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML13501694Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 18 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse WonderLeader
AA Intelligence Index18.5Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured161.8Only Muse Wonder measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index16 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse WonderLeader
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1029Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1096Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1090Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1180Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1236Only 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 Telecom76.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$9,432Only Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse WonderLeader
GPQA Diamond74.5%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured27.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)78.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)14.5%50.1%Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts14401506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert14321513Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14451506Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse WonderLeader
AIME92.7%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)89.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AA Math Index86.0Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)86.0%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
ProofBenchNot measured84.0%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: math14321486Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: mathematical work14471514Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse WonderLeader
MMLU Pro82.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)79.6%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)56.8%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MedQA (Vals AI)92.2%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)82.9%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: science14561506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14551512Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and government14481505Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: business and finance14161483Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Web design benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse WonderLeader
Design Arena: websites11741361Muse Wonder
Design Arena: UI components11471371Muse Wonder
Design Arena: game dev11511380Muse Wonder
Design Arena: data viz11611330Muse Wonder
Design Arena: 3D11291425Muse Wonder
Design Arena: all code categories11661370Muse Wonder
Design Arena: SVG1108Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 2 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index013
General benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse WonderLeader
Vals IndexNot measured64.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured70.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
IFBench43.4%Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)54.0%80.7%Muse Wonder
DTBenchNot measured95.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMCANot measured56.8%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text14401502Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following14101491Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing14121491Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: English14491507Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English14261492Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese14991537Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: German1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1393Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1400Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: French14591523Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Spanish1436Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14181522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Polish1447Not measuredOnly GLM 4.6 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14271510Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries14221493Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language14151496Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14091482Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGLM 4.6Muse 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

GLM 4.6$0.0016Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.014Fits in one request

GLM 4.6 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.034Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.260Fits in one request

GLM 4.6 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GLM 4.6$0.132Exceeds the context window
Muse Wonder$1.00Fits in one request

GLM 4.6 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 GLM 4.6 and Muse Wonder
SpecificationZ.ai GLM 4.6Meta Muse Wonder
MakerZ.aiMeta
WeightsOpen weightsNo public weights listed
ReleasedSeptember 30, 2025October 12, 2026
Context window205K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.55$4.00
Output $/Mtok$2.20$20.00
Coding index52.264.5
Independent measurements behind it21
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GLM 4.6 better than Muse Wonder for coding?

Pick Muse Wonder for coding: it scores 64.5 on the Vibe Coding Index against 52.2 for GLM 4.6, though on 1 benchmark against 2. Pick GLM 4.6 when output tokens cost 9.1x less.

Which is cheaper, GLM 4.6 or Muse Wonder?

GLM 4.6 costs $0.55 per million input tokens and $2.20 per million output tokens; Muse Wonder costs $4.00 and $20.00. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, GLM 4.6 or Muse Wonder?

Muse Wonder, with 1.05M tokens against 205K.

How many benchmarks is the GLM 4.6 vs Muse Wonder comparison based on?

34 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. GLM 4.6's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Muse Wonder's on 1. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next