Which is better: Muse Wonder or GPT-5.6 Terra?

Verdict: Muse Wonder ranks higher (#11 vs #16) and wins 6 of 6 shared benchmarks; GPT-5.6 Terra costs less ($2.50/$15.0 vs $4.00/$20.0 per 1M tokens). AskClash compares Muse Wonder and GPT-5.6 Terra 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 and GPT-5.6 Terra 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 and GPT-5.6 Terra when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

Muse Wonder vs GPT-5.6 Terra: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side Muse Wonder vs GPT-5.6 Terra 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 ranks higher (#11 vs #16) and wins 6 of 6 shared benchmarks; GPT-5.6 Terra costs less ($2.50/$15.0 vs $4.00/$20.0 per 1M tokens).

Open live leaderboard Muse Wonder model page GPT-5.6 Terra model page

Rank #11 vs #16AskClash overall scores 64.7 vs 60.7.

Pricing $4.00/$20.0 vs $2.50/$15.0Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Proprietary vs ProprietaryMeta vs OpenAI.

Muse Wonder vs GPT-5.6 Terra benchmark comparison

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

Metric	Muse Wonder	GPT-5.6 Terra
Overall Score	64.7	60.7
Leaderboard Rank	#11	#16
ACB	62.3	56.4
RWT	—	8.5
Coding Agent Index	—	77.0
HLE	50.1	42.9
GPQA	—	92.9
IFEval	—	71.2
SWE-Pro	—	63.4
SWE-Atlas	—	81.0
Terminal-Bench	52.0	35.4
DeepSWE	78.8	69.6
GDPval-AA	1770.3	1593.0
Finance Agent	56.6	54.4
MMMU-Pro	—	80.7
ARC-AGI 2	—	83.9
Tau2	—	86.3
MRCR	—	89.6
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$4.00	$2.50
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$20.0	$15.0
Context Window	1M	1M
Benchmarks Published	9	15

Muse Wonder vs GPT-5.6 Terra head-to-head charts

Muse Wonder leads 7 and GPT-5.6 Terra leads 0 of 7 shared benchmarks. GPT-5.6 Terra is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

Muse WonderGPT-5.6 Terra

Overall

64.7Muse Wonder

60.7GPT-5.6 Terra

ACB

62.3Muse Wonder

56.4GPT-5.6 Terra

HLE

50.1Muse Wonder

42.9GPT-5.6 Terra

Terminal-Bench

52.0Muse Wonder

35.4GPT-5.6 Terra

DeepSWE

78.8Muse Wonder

69.6GPT-5.6 Terra

GDPval-AA

1770.3Muse Wonder

1593.0GPT-5.6 Terra

Finance Agent

56.6Muse Wonder

54.4GPT-5.6 Terra

Muse Wonder

Input$4.00

Output$20.0

Workload$8.00

Context1M

GPT-5.6 Terra

Input$2.50

Output$15.0

Workload$5.50

Context1M

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

More Muse Wonder and GPT-5.6 Terra comparisons

Explore how Muse Wonder and GPT-5.6 Terra stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Muse Wonder Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Terra Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Wonder Claude Fable 5.1 vs GPT-5.6 Terra Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs GPT-5.6 Terra Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder Claude Opus 5 vs GPT-5.6 Terra Claude Fable 5 vs Muse Wonder Claude Fable 5 vs GPT-5.6 Terra

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.