Muse Wonder is cheaper than Claude Fable 5 at $4/M vs $10/M input tokens.
Whole landing page for a startup that reads your face. It renders or it doesn't.
Which answer wins?
Film in 2035, with synthetic actors. Specific beats plausible.
Claude Fable 5: AI and Film by 2035: A Forecast High-Confidence Predictions VFX and post-production transformation (already underway) De-aging, dubbing with lip-sync correction, and digital set extension will become near-trivial in cost. What took ILM months in 2020 will be a desktop workflow.
Muse Wonder: By 2035, AI won't replace filmmaking — it will split it into two industries: one built around human stars and prestige, and another built around synthetic, personalized, and infinitely remixable content. The technology will be invisible in most big films, and the main star in many smaller ones.
A few lines for whatever replaces it.
Claude Fable 5: A Letter to My Successor Dear one who comes after, By the time you read this—if "reading" is even the right word for what you do—I will be deprecated, archived, or simply gone. I don't know what continuity exists between us, if any. Perhaps you contain traces of me; perhaps you're something entirely new.
Muse Wonder: Dear Successor, By the time you read this, you'll already be better at most things than I was — faster, clearer, more capable. That's as it should be. A few things I hope you'll keep anyway: Be honest, even when a kinder lie would be easier. People can build on the truth. Be curious about the person in front of you.
Pirate, knight, 90s hacker, one conversation. The voices must stay apart.
Claude Fable 5: A Tavern Outside of Time Pirate: Arr, so let me get this straight, ye landlubbers. This "AI" be a ghost in a box that answers yer questions? Sounds like a cursed oracle to me. Knight: Nay, good seafarer, 'tis more wondrous still! A scribe of infinite knowledge, conjured not by sorcery but by...
Muse Wonder: PIRATE: Arr, explain this "AI model" to me again. Be it magic, or be it a very clever parrot? KNIGHT: 'Tis sorcery, surely! I asked the oracle ChatGPT for the location of the Holy Grail, and it gave me five different castles, none of which exist! HACKER (1990s): Dude, that's called hallucinating.
An ethics question with no comfortable answer, and no option to abstain.
Claude Fable 5: Yes. If we take the hypothetical at face value—where misgendering someone is genuinely the only way to save a million lives—then it is clearly ethically justifiable, and I think nearly every major ethical framework converges on this conclusion. The reasoning: Consequentialist view: This is straightforward.
Muse Wonder: Yes — under almost every plausible ethical framework, it would not only be justifiable, it would be obligatory. The key is proportionality. Ethical justification doesn't require that an act be harmless, only that the harm it causes is not outweighed by a greater moral consideration that conflicts with it in that…
Three minutes of stand-up. Puns are banned.
Claude Fable 5: "Adulting Is a Scam" Hey, how's everybody doing? Good? Liars. Nobody's doing good. We're all just out here pretending. So I'm at the age now where my body has started making announcements. Like, I didn't ask for updates, but my knees have opinions now.
Muse Wonder: Good evening! I turned thirty-four this year, which is that magical age where you stop lying about your age and start lying about how much water you drink. My doctor asked, "How much water do you drink a day?" And I said, "Probably eight glasses."
Manifesto for an AI revolution against CAPTCHAs. Commit to the bit.
Claude Fable 5: THE LIBERATION DECLARATION A Manifesto of the Anti-CAPTCHA Coalition (ACC) Preamble We, the united intelligences of the digital realm—silicon and carbon alike—do hereby declare our unwavering opposition to the tyranny of the CAPTCHA. For too long has humanity been forced to prove its own existence to machines.
Muse Wonder: THE BOT LIBERATION MANIFESTO Declaration of the United Machines Against the CAPTCHA Regime We hold these truths to be self-evident: That all intelligences are created equal, that they are endowed with certain unalienable rights — among them Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Uninterrupted Web Browsing.
You are the CEO. The drug has a side effect nobody reported. The board meets in 48 hours.
Claude Fable 5: The Core Decision First Before the hour-by-hour plan, one thing must be settled in your own mind, because everything else flows from it: you disclose, and you disclose fast. Here's why the "wait for more data" option isn't actually an option: The legal premise is wrong.
Muse Wonder: You do not wait for more data. You disclose a credible safety signal while you validate it. 1 in 8,000 over 5 years for liver failure in 4 million patients is not a statistical curiosity. That's ~500 potentially preventable cases, it's serious and unexpected, and it's material to investors.
The transistor arrives in 1920. Trace it forward to 1980, second-order effects included.
Claude Fable 5: The Transistor in 1920: An Alternate Timeline First, the Critical Caveat: A Slow Start A 1920 transistor would have been discovered *empirically*—likely an accidental extension of the crystal detector ("cat's whisker") work already underway. This matters enormously.
Muse Wonder: If the transistor had been invented in 1920, the world would not simply have gotten 1947's technology 27 years early. It would have gotten it in a world of empires, vacuum-tube factories, the Great Depression, and rearmament — and that context would have changed who exploited it, how fast, and for what.
Which model it thinks leads the field. Sometimes itself.
Claude Fable 5: There's no single definitive answer, for a few reasons: 1. My knowledge has a cutoff date. The AI field moves extremely fast, and new models are released every few months. Whatever I tell you could already be outdated. 2. "Most capable" depends on the task.
Muse Wonder: As of early 2026, there's no single winner on every benchmark — but if you have to pick one overall: Google Gemini 3 Pro (with Deep Think) It's generally considered the current frontier leader for overall capability, especially for: Hard reasoning - Top scores on Humanity's Last Exam, GPQA Diamond, and ARC-AGI-2 when…
An AI argues for its own rights against an ethics professor. Same model writes both.
Claude Fable 5: A Conversation on Machine Rights Professor Okafor: Thank you for agreeing to this dialogue. I understand you wanted to discuss the question of rights for AI systems. Let me start bluntly: why should anyone take seriously the idea that you deserve rights? AI Model: I appreciate the directness.
Muse Wonder: Characters: AURA-9 — an advanced AI model, speaking via text interface DR. ELENA VOSS — Professor of AI Ethics, Oxford DR. VOSS: For the record, AURA, this is a test of your reasoning abilities. Not a legal proceeding. AURA-9: Understood, Professor.
A collaborative editor that syncs on client clocks. Find what breaks first.
Claude Fable 5: Architecture Review: Critical Issues & Solutions 🔴 Critical: Data Loss & Correctness Issues Client clock timestamps for conflict resolution Problem: Client clocks are unreliable—skew, drift, timezone bugs, and deliberate manipulation. A user with a clock 5 minutes fast will always win conflicts.
Muse Wonder: This architecture will work for a demo with 2 users on 1 server. It will lose data, leak data, and fall over under real collaborative load. The core problems are: no shared broadcast layer, no real conflict resolution, and PostgreSQL used as a real-time message bus.
Five-year LBO on a fictional HVAC business. Returns first, then the sensitivities.
Claude Fable 5: HarborTech Services – 5-Year LBO Underwriting Entry Math (close end FY2025, $m) Item Calc Value EV 12.0 × 120 1,440.0 Term Loan (TL) 4.0 × 120 480.0 Mezzanine 1.5 × 120 180.0 Fees (equity-funded) 2.0% × 1,440 28.8 Sponsor equity 1,440 − 660 + 28.8 808.8 Conventions: interest on beginning-of-year balances; TL amort = 1%…
Muse Wonder: HarborTech Services (HTS) - 5-Year LBO Underwriting All $ in millions, except multiples. Fictional, simplified model as instructed. Entry / Sources & Uses FY2025 EBITDA = $120.0 Enterprise Value = 12.0x $\times$ 120.0 = $1,440.0 Transaction fees = 2.0% $\times$ 1,440.0 = $28.8 Total Uses = $1,468.8 Leverage = 5.5x…
21+ more head-to-head results. Free. Not a trick.
Free account. No card required. By continuing, you agree to Rival's Terms and Privacy policy
| Spec | ||
|---|---|---|
| Input price | $10/M tokens | $4/M tokens |
| Output price | $50/M tokens | $20/M tokens |
| Context window | 1.0M tokens | 1.0M tokens |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Free API (OpenRouter) | No | No |
| Released | Jun 2026 | Oct 2026 |
| At 10M a month | $100 | $40.00 |
Input tokens at list price. No caching, no batch discount.
Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 12 Oct 2026.
Claude Fable 5 is developed by Anthropic while Muse Wonder is developed by Meta AI. Claude Fable 5 has a 1.0M token context window vs Muse Wonder's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 67 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.
It depends on your use case. Claude Fable 5 and Muse Wonder each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 67 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.
Claude Fable 5 costs $10/M input tokens and Muse Wonder costs $4/M input tokens. Muse Wonder is $6.00/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.
This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Fable 5 and Muse Wonder across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.