Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Muse Wonder vs Phi 4

Updated October 21, 2026. 26 benchmarks have a result for both. Coding is ranked on the Vibe Coding Index; every other board is shown as published.

Muse WonderMeta
Coding
71.9
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$20.00
26
Phi 4Microsoft
Coding
No data
Overall
5.9
Output $/M
$0.14
0
vs boards won of 26 shared

Decision reading

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Phi 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Phi 4 has the edge where output tokens cost 142.9x less.

Shared results
26
Muse Wonder only
34
Phi 4 only
19
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
Muse Wonder 71.9 from 3 benchmarks, Phi 4 not benchmarked.
Widest category
General, 52.2 points apart on average over 13 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR): Muse Wonder 80.7% against Phi 4 0.0%, 80.7 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Muse Wonder $20.00 against Phi 4 $0.14 per million output tokens, 142.9x apart.
Context window
Muse Wonder takes 1.05M tokens, Phi 4 16K.

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
CategoryMuse WonderBarsPhi 4Ties
Coding20
Intelligence10
Reasoning40
Math20
Knowledge40
General130
All shared boards260
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index20
Coding benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
LMArena WebDev1652Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)49.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)83.1%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Code migration (Vals AI)62.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
IOI (Vals AI)66.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
SWE-bench Multimodal (Vals AI)45.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vibe Code Bench 1-100 (Vals AI)26.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)80.4%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured23.1%Only Phi 4 measured
SciCode60.3%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured3.8%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: coding15221231Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: software and IT15151228Muse Wonder
LMArena WebDev: React1641Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML1694Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index10
Intelligence benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
AA Intelligence IndexNot measured5.9Only Phi 4 measured
Epoch Capabilities Index161.8130.5Muse Wonder
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index13 boards, none shared
Agentic work benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
Design Arena: spreadsheets1232Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)56.6%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)36.3%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)50.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark (Vals AI)23.8%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)67.1%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)67.0%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Terminal-Bench-Science (Vals AI)22.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Vals Science Index39.1%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
CUA-bench (Vals AI)7.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
τ²-Bench TelecomNot measured0.0%Only Phi 4 measured
BALROGNot measured11.6%Only Phi 4 measured
Vending-Bench 2$9,432Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Neither model has a result on the other 26 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Reasoning benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
MysteryMechanism (Vals AI)27.5%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured57.5%Only Phi 4 measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)50.1%3.8%Muse Wonder
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)Not measured56.1%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts15061220Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: expert15131203Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English15061230Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 14 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index20
Math benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
AA Math IndexNot measured18.0Only Phi 4 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured18.0%Only Phi 4 measured
OTIS Mock AIMENot measured13.8%Only Phi 4 measured
ProofBench84.0%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
MATH level 5Not measured64.9%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: math14861246Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: mathematical work15141254Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index40
Knowledge benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)Not measured71.4%Only Phi 4 measured
MMLUNot measured84.8%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: science15061206Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare15121202Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: legal and government15051241Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: business and finance14831199Muse Wonder
Neither model has a result on the other 11 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
Design Arena: websites1361Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: UI components1374Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: game dev1379Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: data viz1321Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: 3D1425Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Design Arena: all code categories1370Not measuredOnly 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 index130
General benchmarks for Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
Vals Index64.9%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)70.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
IFBenchNot measured23.5%Only Phi 4 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)80.7%0.0%Muse Wonder
DTBench95.2%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
LMCA56.8%Not measuredOnly Muse Wonder measured
Creative writing (Lech Mazur)Not measured62.6%Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text15021217Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: instruction following14911201Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: creative writing14911181Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: English15071231Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: non-English14921197Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: Chinese15371212Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: GermanNot measured1222Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: JapaneseNot measured1158Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: KoreanNot measured1151Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: French15231224Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: SpanishNot measured1234Only Phi 4 measured
LMArena Text: Russian15221209Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: multi-turn15101206Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: longer queries14931217Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: writing and language14961198Muse Wonder
LMArena Text: entertainment and media14821162Muse 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 Muse Wonder and Phi 4
BenchmarkMuse WonderPhi 4Leader
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

Muse Wonder$0.014Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0001Fits in one request

Phi 4 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Muse Wonder$0.260Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.0039Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Muse Wonder$1.00Fits in one request
Phi 4$0.015Exceeds the context window

Phi 4 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 Muse Wonder and Phi 4
SpecificationMeta Muse WonderMicrosoft Phi 4
MakerMetaMicrosoft
WeightsNo public weights listedOpen weights
ReleasedOctober 12, 2026January 10, 2025
Context window1.05M16K
Input $/Mtok$4.00$0.07
Output $/Mtok$20.00$0.14
Coding index71.9Not benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it30
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Muse Wonder better than Phi 4 for coding?

Only Muse Wonder has a coding score, 71.9 on the Vibe Coding Index; Phi 4 has none, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Phi 4 has the edge where output tokens cost 142.9x less.

Which is cheaper, Muse Wonder or Phi 4?

Muse Wonder costs $4.00 per million input tokens and $20.00 per million output tokens; Phi 4 costs $0.07 and $0.14. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.

Which has the bigger context window, Muse Wonder or Phi 4?

Muse Wonder, with 1.05M tokens against 16K.

How many benchmarks is the Muse Wonder vs Phi 4 comparison based on?

26 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 21, 2026. Muse Wonder's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Phi 4's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next