Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) vs Muse Wonder

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) costs 1.3x less per output token than Muse Wonder ($15.00 vs $20.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 24 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-4o (2024-05-13) Replace Muse Wonder
GPT-4o (2024-05-13)OpenAI
Coding
No data
Overall
27.1
Output $/M
$15.00
0
Muse WonderMeta
Coding
71.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$20.00
24
vs boards won of 24 shared

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) or Muse Wonder: which to pick

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o (2024-05-13) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick GPT-4o (2024-05-13) for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($15.00 vs $20.00 per million).

Model AGPT-4o (2024-05-13)OpenAINot benchmarkedNo coding benchmarkNo cost per solved taskModel BMuse WonderMeta71.9/1003 independent benchmarksNo cost per solved task
Shared results
24
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) only
20
Muse Wonder only
36
Like-for-like categories
5 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
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) not benchmarked, Muse Wonder 71.9 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Reasoning, 41.3 points apart on average over 4 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run): GPT-4o (2024-05-13) 1.8% against Muse Wonder 50.1%, 48.3 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) $15.00 against Muse Wonder $20.00 per million output tokens, 1.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-4o (2024-05-13) takes 128K 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
CategoryGPT-4o (2024-05-13)BarsMuse WonderTies
Coding02
Reasoning04
Math02
Knowledge04
General012
All shared boards024
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index02
Coding benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse WonderLeader
LMArena WebDevNot measured1652Only Muse Wonder measured
AA Coding Index24.2Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) 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)33.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
SciCodeNot measured60.3%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text: coding12971522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT12971515Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1641Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1694Only Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 28 boards here
IntelligenceDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index2 boards, none shared
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse WonderLeader
AA Intelligence Index7.3Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Epoch Capabilities IndexNot measured161.8Only Muse Wonder measured
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse WonderLeader
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1258Only 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
METR time horizons40.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
BALROG32.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Vending-Bench 2Not measured$9,432Only Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 29 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse WonderLeader
GPQA Diamond50.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured27.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)52.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)1.8%50.1%Muse Wonder
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)48.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts12811506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert12501513Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English12931506Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Math benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse WonderLeader
OTIS Mock AIME6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
ProofBenchNot measured84.0%Only Muse Wonder measured
MATH level 551.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: math12841486Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: mathematical work12841514Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse WonderLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)74.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
MMLU84.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: science12951506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare12781512Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and government13141505Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: business and finance12621483Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse WonderLeader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1363Only Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1380Only Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1379Only Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1312Only Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1428Only Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1372Only Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index012
General benchmarks for GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse WonderLeader
Vals IndexNot measured64.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured70.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)Not measured80.7%Only Muse Wonder measured
DTBenchNot measured95.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMCANot measured56.8%Only Muse Wonder measured
LMArena Text13001502Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following12781491Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing12911491Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision1137Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: English13121507Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English12831492Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese12771537Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: German1283Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1257Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: Korean1234Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: French13041523Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Spanish1292Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: Russian12851522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Polish1365Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13021510Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries12881493Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language12981496Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media12891482Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision: English1147Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1132Not measuredOnly GPT-4o (2024-05-13) measured
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 GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-4o (2024-05-13)Muse 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

GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$0.013Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.014Fits in one request

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$0.295Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.260Fits in one request

Muse Wonder costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-4o (2024-05-13)$1.15Exceeds the context window
Muse Wonder$1.00Fits in one request

Muse Wonder 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 GPT-4o (2024-05-13) and Muse Wonder
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-4o (2024-05-13)Meta Muse Wonder
MakerOpenAIMeta
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMay 13, 2024October 12, 2026
Context window128K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$5.00$4.00
Output $/Mtok$15.00$20.00
Coding indexNot benchmarked71.9
Independent measurements behind it03
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-4o (2024-05-13) better than Muse Wonder for coding?

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; GPT-4o (2024-05-13) has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick GPT-4o (2024-05-13) for output tokens 1.3x cheaper ($15.00 vs $20.00 per million).

Which is cheaper, GPT-4o (2024-05-13) or Muse Wonder?

GPT-4o (2024-05-13) costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $15.00 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, GPT-4o (2024-05-13) or Muse Wonder?

Muse Wonder, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-4o (2024-05-13) vs Muse Wonder comparison based on?

24 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-4o (2024-05-13)'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