Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | — | 2.4T |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | 1M | 1M |
| Benchmarks | ||
DeepSWE 1.1Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | 78.8% | 69.3% |
JobBenchProfessional tool use — Tests the AI on professional workplace tasks that require using real work tools — the kind of multi-step jobs an office worker handles. Higher is better. | 70.5% | 64% |
AutomationBenchBusiness workflows — Tests whether the AI can run real multi-step business workflows — the kind of end-to-end office processes companies want to automate — from start to finish. Higher is better. | 39.1% | 50.8% |
SWE-Marathon v1.1Multi-hour coding — Twenty multi-hour programming jobs — rebuilding a library, cloning a product, training a model, making something faster. A run counts only when every check passes, hidden tests and interface review included. Higher is better. | 53.1% | — |
NL2Repo-BenchRepo-level code generation — Tests whether the AI can turn a natural-language requirement into working code across an entire repository, not just produce a single function or patch. Higher is better. | — | 64.9% |
QwenSWEBench V2Software engineering — Qwen's in-house coding benchmark, second version, built around complex real-world software-engineering tasks. Scores are not comparable with the first version. Higher is better. | — | 70% |
Terminal-Bench 4.0Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Version 4.0 recalibrated how much time, CPU and memory each task gets, removed eight tasks and fixed nineteen, so fewer runs fail for reasons that have nothing to do with the model. Scores are not comparable with earlier versions. Higher is better. | — | 26.97% |
Terminal-Bench 3.0Agentic terminal coding — command-line task completion (v3.0, much harder task set) | — | 29% |
CoWorkBenchLong-horizon office work — Tests long-running office tasks across fields including computer science, finance, law, medicine, and other productivity work. Higher is better. | — | 76.1% |
Toolathlon-VerifiedPersonal tool use — Tests how well the AI uses everyday personal tools and apps to get things done — a human-checked version of Toolathlon. Higher is better. | — | 73.3% |
Finance Agent v2Agentic financial analysis — Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | 56.6% | — |
HealthBench ProfessionalHealth — Realistic health conversations graded against detailed rubrics written by physicians — can the AI respond the way a careful medical professional would? Higher is better. | 60.5% | — |
GDP.PDFDocument comprehension — Real professional PDFs — filings, reports, technical documents — with questions an expert in that field would ask. Tests whether the AI reads the page as a document, layout and figures included, rather than as loose text. Higher is better. | 30.8% | — |
MMMU-ProMultimodal reasoning — A tougher version of MMMU — college-level questions that mix images, diagrams, and text together. Higher is better. | — | 82.7% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | Qwen |
| Release date | Oct 12 2026 | Sep 2 2026 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Muse WondervsClaude Haiku 5.5Qwen3.8-Max-0902vsClaude Haiku 5.5Muse WondervsGPT-6.1 SolQwen3.8-Max-0902vsGPT-6.1 SolMuse WondervsGemini 4 ArgonQwen3.8-Max-0902vsGemini 4 ArgonMuse WondervsGrok 4.7Qwen3.8-Max-0902vsGrok 4.7Muse WondervsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashQwen3.8-Max-0902vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashMuse WondervsMistral Large 4Qwen3.8-Max-0902vsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Muse Wonder leads Qwen3.8-Max-0902 on 2 of the 3 benchmarks they both report (DeepSWE 1.1, JobBench, AutomationBench). Qwen3.8-Max-0902 shipped 40 days before Muse Wonder, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Muse Wonder) vs 1M (Qwen3.8-Max-0902).
On DeepSWE 1.1, Muse Wonder leads at 78.8% vs Qwen3.8-Max-0902 at 69.3%. On JobBench, Muse Wonder leads at 70.5% vs Qwen3.8-Max-0902 at 64%. On AutomationBench, Qwen3.8-Max-0902 leads at 50.8% vs Muse Wonder at 39.1%.