Which is better: Muse Wonder Full or Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)?

Verdict: Muse Wonder Full ranks higher (#7 vs #13). AskClash compares Muse Wonder Full and Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) side by side across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, AskClash ACB, and context window so you can see which model wins on each benchmark.

How do Muse Wonder Full and Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) compare on coding benchmarks?

The comparison table shows SWE-bench, SWE-Pro, SWE-Atlas, Terminal-Bench, DeepSWE, and coding agent index scores for both Muse Wonder Full and Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

Muse Wonder Full vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh): benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side Muse Wonder Full vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) comparison across SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, coding agent scores, token pricing, context window, and AskClash RWT. Green marks the winner on each benchmark.

Verdict: Muse Wonder Full ranks higher (#7 vs #13).

Open live leaderboard Muse Wonder Full model page Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) model page

Rank #7 vs #13AskClash overall scores 71.2 vs 69.0.

Pricing —/— vs —/—Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Proprietary vs AI modelMeta vs Anthropic.

Muse Wonder Full vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) benchmark comparison

Green cells highlight the winning model for each metric. Scores are cached from the AskClash LLM leaderboard snapshot.

Metric	Muse Wonder Full	Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)
Overall Score	71.2	69.0
Leaderboard Rank	#7	#13
ACB	—	79.2
RWT	—	9.0
HLE	53.6	58.7
GPQA	—	93.4
Terminal-Bench	57.1	—
DeepSWE	79.0	—
GDPval-AA	1857.1	1732.1
Finance Agent	59.1	—
ARC-AGI 2	—	90.0
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	—	—
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	—	—
Context Window	1M	—
Benchmarks Published	8	8

Muse Wonder Full vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) head-to-head charts

Muse Wonder Full leads 2 and Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) leads 1 of 3 shared benchmarks. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

Muse Wonder FullClaude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)

Overall

71.2Muse Wonder Full

69.0Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)

HLE

53.6Muse Wonder Full

58.7Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)

GDPval-AA

1857.1Muse Wonder Full

1732.1Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)

Muse Wonder Full

Input—

Output—

Workload—

Context1M

Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)

Input—

Output—

Workload—

Context—

Workload = published cost of 1M input + 200K output tokens. Open the live leaderboard for interactive compare charts.

More Muse Wonder Full and Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) comparisons

Explore how Muse Wonder Full and Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh) stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Muse Wonder Full Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Wonder Full Claude Fable 5.1 vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder Full Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder Full Claude Opus 5 vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)Claude Fable 5 vs Muse Wonder Full Claude Fable 5 vs Claude Fable 5.1 (XHigh)

How to read this comparison

Benchmark scores

Higher is better for all benchmark scores (SWE-bench, GPQA, HLE, Terminal-Bench, etc.). Green marks the model with the higher score.

Token pricing

Lower is better for input and output prices. Green marks the cheaper model per 1M tokens.

Coverage matters

Models with fewer disclosed benchmark cells may have inflated percentile scores. Check the benchmark cell count for context.

This comparison page is generated from the AskClash LLM leaderboard cache. Open the live leaderboard for real-time scores and interactive filtering.