Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.5 vs Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder leads GPT-5.5 on coding, 71.9 to 71.3 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Muse Wonder costs 1.5x less per output token ($20.00 vs $30.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 47 benchmarks have a result for both.

GPT-5.5OpenAI
Coding
71.3
Overall
69.2
Output $/M
$30.00
3
Muse WonderMeta
Coding
71.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$20.00
44
vs boards won of 47 shared

GPT-5.5 or Muse Wonder: which to pick

GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder are level for coding, 71.3 against 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index, so price and context decide.

Pick GPT-5.5 for a larger context window (1.05M against 1.05M tokens) and work measured by LMArena Text: math or Long context reasoning (AA-LCR), where it leads. Pick Muse Wonder for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($20.00 vs $30.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena WebDev or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Shared results
47
GPT-5.5 only
87
Muse Wonder only
13
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
GPT-5.5 71.3 from 5 benchmarks, Muse Wonder 71.9 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Web design, 14.7 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: GPT-5.5 50.0% against Muse Wonder 84.0%, 34.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.5 $30.00 against Muse Wonder $20.00 per million output tokens, 1.5x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.5 takes 1.05M 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-5.5BarsMuse WonderTies
Coding08
Intelligence01
Agentic work05
Reasoning04
Math12
Knowledge04
Web design06
General214
All shared boards344
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index08
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse WonderLeader
LiveBench coding85.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena WebDev15131652Muse Wonder
AA Coding Index74.9Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)82.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured49.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)69.8%83.1%Muse Wonder
Code migration (Vals AI)45.2%62.5%Muse Wonder
ProgramBench (Vals AI)0.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured66.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)76.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 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
SkillsBench (Vals AI)62.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured80.4%Only Muse Wonder measured
SciCode56.1%60.3%Muse Wonder
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)60.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Terminal-Bench84.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
FrontierCode43.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
GSO-Bench40.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
WeirdML84.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MirrorCode10.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ALE-Bench1943.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: coding14941522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT14931515Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: React15061641Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: HTML15431694Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: from an image1532Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse WonderLeader
AA Intelligence Index38.4Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index159.7161.8Muse Wonder
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse WonderLeader
AA Agentic Index36.4Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps1117Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps1089Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps1142Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android apps1164Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building Godot games1173Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: agents building games1179Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: HTML slides1017Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slides1084Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1243Only Muse Wonder measured
LiveBench research61.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench browser48.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench long agentic44.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)3.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)51.8%56.6%Muse Wonder
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)21.8%36.3%Muse Wonder
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)40.4%50.5%Muse Wonder
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured23.8%Only Muse Wonder measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)64.5%67.1%Muse Wonder
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
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)8.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)Not measured7.2%Only Muse Wonder measured
τ²-Bench Telecom93.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
APEX-Agents55.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Remote Labor Index6.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
OSWorld 2.013.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
DeepResearch Bench54.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
PostTrainBench27.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Vending-Bench 2$7,524$9,432Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse WonderLeader
GPQA Diamond93.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench reasoning89.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)Not measured27.5%Only Muse Wonder measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)88.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)93.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)45.8%50.1%Muse Wonder
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)90.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ARC-AGI95.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ARC-AGI-285.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
SimpleBench69.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Chess puzzles63.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Mystery game puzzles56.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
EBR-bench34.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14891506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert15071513Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14831506Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision: diagrams1325Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: homework1332Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark88.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index12
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse WonderLeader
OTIS Mock AIME84.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 385.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
FrontierMath, tier 472.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ProofBench50.0%84.0%Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: math14871486GPT-5.5
LMArena Text: mathematical work14961514Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index04
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse WonderLeader
MMLU Pro88.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LegalBench (Vals AI)86.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
CaseLaw (Vals AI)66.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)68.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MortgageTax (Vals AI)68.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
SimpleQA Verified63.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: science14851506Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14651512Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and government14911505Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: business and finance14781483Muse Wonder
FACTS Benchmark Suite66.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 5 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index06
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse WonderLeader
Design Arena: websites12561362Muse Wonder
Design Arena: UI components12571379Muse Wonder
Design Arena: game dev12931376Muse Wonder
Design Arena: data viz12641317Muse Wonder
Design Arena: 3D11971427Muse Wonder
Design Arena: all code categories12601371Muse Wonder
Design Arena: SVG1234Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Design Arena: ASCII art1255Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LiveBench design70.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index214
General benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse WonderLeader
Vals IndexNot measured64.9%Only Muse Wonder measured
LiveBench data analysis81.6%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)60.9%70.2%Muse Wonder
SAGE (Vals AI)51.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
MedScribe (Vals AI)86.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Vals Multimodal Index68.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
IFBench75.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)84.3%80.7%GPT-5.5
DTBench96.0%95.2%GPT-5.5
LMCA54.3%56.8%Muse Wonder
Surface Evolver Bench88.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Furniture assembly44.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
ExploitBench47.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
CL-bench Life22.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text14711502Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following14781491Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing14551491Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision1297Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: English14701507Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English14671492Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese15341537Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: German1480Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1499Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Korean1460Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: French14851523Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Spanish1468Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: Russian14731522Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Polish1465Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn14761510Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries14841493Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language14661496Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14491482Muse Wonder
LMArena Vision: English1292Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: Chinese1360Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: reading text1306Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: humor1293Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1231Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1301Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
LMArena Document1486Not measuredOnly GPT-5.5 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder
BenchmarkGPT-5.5Muse 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-5.5$0.020Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.014Fits in one request

Muse Wonder costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.5$0.340Fits in one request
Muse Wonder$0.260Fits in one request

Muse Wonder costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.5$1.30Fits in one request
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-5.5 and Muse Wonder
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.5Meta Muse Wonder
MakerOpenAIMeta
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedApril 24, 2026October 12, 2026
Context window1.05M1.05M
Input $/Mtok$5.00$4.00
Output $/Mtok$30.00$20.00
Coding index71.371.9
Independent measurements behind it53
Cost per solved task$1.65Not computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.5 better than Muse Wonder for coding?

GPT-5.5 and Muse Wonder are level for coding, 71.3 against 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index, so price and context decide. Pick GPT-5.5 for a larger context window (1.05M against 1.05M tokens) and work measured by LMArena Text: math or Long context reasoning (AA-LCR), where it leads. Pick Muse Wonder for output tokens 1.5x cheaper ($20.00 vs $30.00 per million) and work measured by LMArena WebDev or Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI), where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.5 or Muse Wonder?

GPT-5.5 costs $5.00 per million input tokens and $30.00 per million output tokens; Muse Wonder costs $4.00 and $20.00. Cost per solved task is known for GPT-5.5 only.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.5 or Muse Wonder?

GPT-5.5, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.5 vs Muse Wonder comparison based on?

47 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.5's coding index rests on 5 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

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-5-5-vs-meta-muse-wonder" title="GPT-5.5 vs Muse Wonder, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-5-5-vs-meta-muse-wonder">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.5 vs Muse Wonder</a></p>