Skip to content
View original post on X: Alexandr Wang
Published
Same story62/100

Meta's Muse Ember matches Claude Haiku 5.5 on the Intelligence Index at a third of the cost

AIMeta says its Muse Ember model scores 36 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, matching Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) at about a third of the cost per task. Artificial Analysis reports Muse Ember (max) at $0.14 per task and says it is the cheapest model scoring 36 or higher.
Alexandr WangVerified on X
@alexandr_wang
View on X

our teeny model muse ember is now on the efficient frontier 🤗

matching haiku at 3x cheaper cost per task, and smarter than luna

Artificial Analysis@ArtificialAnlys
Meta's newest model Muse Ember scores 36 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, matching Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) at a third of the Cost per Task Muse Ember is Meta's newest efficient-tier model line, with the same input and output token prices as Claude Haiku 5.5 and GPT-6 Luna Key Takeaways: ➤ On the Intelligence Index vs. Cost per Task Pareto frontier at both max and xhigh effort. Muse Ember (max) is the cheapest model scoring 36 or higher, at $0.14 per task, and Muse Ember (xhigh) scores 34 for $0.12. Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) costs almost 3x more at $0.41 for the same score as Muse Ember (max). Muse Ember (max) is also about 4x cheaper than DeepSeek V4.1 Flash 1017 (max, 33, $0.60) and GLM-5.3-Flash (28, $0.58) ➤ 8 points behind Muse Wonder for about 1/50th of the Cost per Task. Muse Wonder (max) scores 44 at $6.95 per Intelligence Index task ➤ Stands out on AutomationBench-AA. Muse Ember (max) scores 68.1% on AutomationBench-AA, level with Muse Wonder (max), and beats Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) on GDP.pdf (22.8% vs 20.8%), but trails it on AA-Briefcase (1521 vs 1574 Elo) ➤ Mixed in agentic coding in our Intelligence Index evaluations. It beats Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) on Terminal-Bench 4.0 (40.9% vs 32.8%) but trails it on FrontierCode 2.0 (27.2% vs 34.9%) ➤ Ahead of similarly priced models when running in its own coding agent. In Muse Code, Muse Ember (max) scores 46 on the Artificial Analysis Coding Agent Index, ahead of Claude Haiku 5.5 in Claude Code (max, 37) and GPT-6 Luna in Codex (max, 31) ➤ Knowledge is the main weakness, but it rarely hallucinates. Its AA-Omniscience accuracy of 21.1% is the lowest of the similarly intelligent models we compared, against 34.7% for Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) and 50.5% for Gemini 3.8 Flash (high). This is mostly because it declines to answer 64% of questions, which keeps its hallucination rate at 17.4%, half of Claude Haiku 5.5’s (max) Other details: ➤ Pricing: $0.10 input / $0.004 cached input / $0.50 output per 1M tokens ➤ Reasoning effort: results shown at max effort, with xhigh also on the Intelligence vs. Cost chart ➤ Availability: Meta's first-party API and Muse Code
View quoted post on X

This story is featured in top picks: “Artificial Analysis finds Meta's Muse Ember cheapest at Intelligence Index score 36”

Source details

Alexandr Wang · x.comPublished · added here

Original title: our teeny model muse ember is now on the efficient frontier 🤗