Which is better: Muse Wonder or Kimi K3?

Verdict: Muse Wonder ranks higher (#11 vs #28) and wins 6 of 6 shared benchmarks; Kimi K3 costs less ($3.00/$15.0 vs $4.00/$20.0 per 1M tokens). AskClash compares Muse Wonder and Kimi K3 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 Kimi K3 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 Kimi K3 when publicly disclosed.

LLM Comparison

Muse Wonder vs Kimi K3: benchmark scores, pricing & comparison.

Side-by-side Muse Wonder vs Kimi K3 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 #28) and wins 6 of 6 shared benchmarks; Kimi K3 costs less ($3.00/$15.0 vs $4.00/$20.0 per 1M tokens).

Open live leaderboard Muse Wonder model page Kimi K3 model page

Rank #11 vs #28AskClash overall scores 64.7 vs 55.8.

Pricing $4.00/$20.0 vs $3.00/$15.0Input and output token prices per 1M tokens when published.

Proprietary vs Open WeightMeta vs Moonshot AI.

Muse Wonder vs Kimi K3 benchmark comparison

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

Metric	Muse Wonder	Kimi K3
Overall Score	64.7	55.8
Leaderboard Rank	#11	#28
ACB	62.3	57.7
RWT	—	8.0
Coding Agent Index	—	51.9
HLE	50.1	43.5
GPQA	—	93.5
SWE-Atlas	—	66.1
Terminal-Bench	52.0	12.6
DeepSWE	78.8	68.5
GDPval-AA	1770.3	1668.0
MCP Atlas	—	84.2
Finance Agent	56.6	53.1
CharXiv	—	84.8
MMMU-Pro	—	81.6
ARC-AGI 2	—	60.4
Input Price (per 1M tokens)	$4.00	$3.00
Output Price (per 1M tokens)	$20.0	$15.0
Context Window	1M	1M
Benchmarks Published	9	16

Muse Wonder vs Kimi K3 head-to-head charts

Muse Wonder leads 7 and Kimi K3 leads 0 of 7 shared benchmarks. Kimi K3 is cheaper on a defined 1M-input / 200K-output workload. Charts show only benchmarks both models publish.

Muse WonderKimi K3

Overall

64.7Muse Wonder

55.8Kimi K3

ACB

62.3Muse Wonder

57.7Kimi K3

HLE

50.1Muse Wonder

43.5Kimi K3

Terminal-Bench

52.0Muse Wonder

12.6Kimi K3

DeepSWE

78.8Muse Wonder

68.5Kimi K3

GDPval-AA

1770.3Muse Wonder

1668.0Kimi K3

Finance Agent

56.6Muse Wonder

53.1Kimi K3

Muse Wonder

Input$4.00

Output$20.0

Workload$8.00

Context1M

Kimi K3

Input$3.00

Output$15.0

Workload$6.00

Context1M

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

More Muse Wonder and Kimi K3 comparisons

Explore how Muse Wonder and Kimi K3 stack up against other top-ranked LLMs.

Claude Opus 5.5 vs Muse Wonder Claude Opus 5.5 vs Kimi K3 Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Wonder Claude Fable 5.1 vs Kimi K3 Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Wonder Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Kimi K3 Claude Opus 5 vs Muse Wonder Claude Opus 5 vs Kimi K3 Claude Fable 5 vs Muse Wonder Claude Fable 5 vs Kimi K3

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.