Model Comparison
Muse Wonder vs MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed
Too close to call: the best configurations, Muse Wonder (max) and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on), are 15 Elo apart, and their 95% ranges overlap. Among 80 models, each ranked by its best configuration, Muse Wonder is #16 and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed is #18. Cost per script: $0.309 for Muse Wonder (max) and $0.177 for MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on).
Last updated , from board data generated at 20:08 UTC.
Picks and Verdict
Ranks in the picks and verdict are configuration ranks: each setting's place among all 132 configurations. The cards above give each model's rank.
PickMuse Wonder
Muse Wonder (max)
Pick Muse Wonder (max) when substance matters more than speed, since it leads MiMo by 4.1 points there and the board can't separate their Writing Elo.
PickMiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed
MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on)
Pick MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) as the default, since the board can't separate it from Muse's best and it's cheaper, at $0.177, and back in half a minute.
Muse Wonder (max) and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) are #31 and #34 on the board, 15 Elo apart with overlapping 95% ranges, so the board can't separate them. Ranked by best setting, that's the #16 model of 80 against the #18 model. MiMo wins on both price and speed: $0.177 a script against $0.309, and half a minute against 2.0, so Muse costs about 1.7 times as much and takes four times as long. Muse still takes seven of the ten scripts, carried by substance, 4.1 points up, with a slightly better hook and continuity. MiMo is 6.9 points better on length and about a point and a half better on both tone and craft. Dropping Muse below max only makes things worse. Muse Wonder (high) and Muse Wonder (adaptive), where the model picks its own level, cost a few cents less than MiMo but sit 326 and 386 Elo below it with separate ranges, both far behind on Length Adherence. I'd run MiMo for nearly everything here and keep Muse at max for fact-heavy scripts where the extra substance is worth the wait.
How to Read the Writing Score, Writing Elo and 95% Ranges
Writing Score and Writing Elo. The Writing Score (0 to 100) is the weighted average of the nine metric scores: seven from the judges, Length Adherence from code and the Slop Score half from each. The Writing Elo is a rating from pairwise comparisons: on each script, each configuration's average across its drafts is compared with every other configuration's, and gaps within the draft-to-draft variation count as draws. Elo rewards winning often, so the two can put configurations in a different order.
Elo ranges. Each 95% range shows how far a configuration's Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently. It comes from resampling every configuration's recorded draft scores on each reference script and ranking again. Comparing two separate ranges does not test the Elo gap between them: ranges far apart are strong evidence for the order, and overlapping ranges do not mean a tie. The reference scripts stay fixed, so the ranges say nothing about new scripts. The methodology page has the full description.
All Thinking Levels of Both Models
Every ranked configuration of Muse Wonder and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed, scored on the same 10 scripts by the same four judges.
- Each row is one configuration: the model at one thinking level. The dot is its Writing Elo, a rating from pairwise comparisons of the scores on each script, and the bar is its 95% range: how far that Elo could move if the drafts had come out slightly differently.
- When two bars overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations. Bars far apart are strong evidence for the order.
- The table under the chart lists the same configurations in the same order and adds the Writing Score (the 0 to 100 consensus of the judges and code), cost, time and configuration rank (the place among all configurations on the board).
Shaded rows are the configurations chosen for the metric comparison below.
| Configuration | Writing Elo | 95% Range | Writing Score | Cost / Script | Time / Script | Reasoning Tokens | Configuration Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Muse Wonder (max) | 2005 | 1959 to 2044 | 80.6 | $0.309 | 2.0 min | 9,601 | #31 |
| MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) | 1990 | 1947 to 2037 | 80.6 | $0.177 | 0.5 min | 10,745 | #34 |
| Muse Wonder (high) | 1664 | 1600 to 1724 | 76.7 | $0.149 | 0.9 min | 1,385 | #58 |
| Muse Wonder (adaptive) | 1604 | 1550 to 1661 | 76.2 | $0.139 | 0.8 min | 766 | #70 |
Cost is one script at the API list price of the route used, uncached and without judging. Time is the average for one accepted script, retries included.
Computed Findings Across Thinking Levels
Each finding is computed from the configurations above. Where two 95% ranges overlap, the board cannot order those two configurations.
- Best Configurations Head to Head. Muse Wonder (max) at Elo 2005 (range 1959 to 2044) and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) at Elo 1990 (range 1947 to 2037) have overlapping 95% ranges, so the board cannot separate the two best configurations.
- Cheapest Configuration Overlapping the Top One. MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on), at $0.177 per script, is the cheapest configuration whose 95% range overlaps that of Muse Wonder (max), at $0.309 per script: 1947 to 2037 against 1959 to 2044, so the board cannot separate them. Muse Wonder (max) costs about 1.7 times as much per script.
- Cheapest Muse Wonder Configuration Above MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed's Best. The cheapest Muse Wonder configuration with a higher Writing Elo than MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on), at Elo 1990 and $0.177 per script, is Muse Wonder (max), at Elo 2005 and $0.309 per script. Their 95% ranges overlap, so the board cannot separate them. It costs about 1.7 times as much per script.
- Lowest to Highest Thinking Level. Muse Wonder moves +341 Elo from high to max, at about 2.1 times the cost per script.
Two Chosen Configurations Compared
Pick one configuration of each model to compare their metric scores, consistency across drafts and per-script scores. Each menu starts on the model's best configuration.
Scores by Metric
Muse Wonder (max) scores higher on five of the nine metrics and MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) on four. The weight beside each metric is its share of the Writing Score.
Consistency Across Drafts
| Muse Wonder (max) | MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) | |
|---|---|---|
| Score spread across drafts (±) | 1.91 | 1.87 |
| Lowest script score | 78.2 Script 10 | 78.5 Script 4 |
| Highest script score | 82.2 Script 5 | 82.3 Script 7 |
| Range across scripts | 4.0 | 3.8 |
Spread is how much the Writing Score moves between a configuration's drafts, and lower is steadier. Green marks the better number in each row.
Scores by Script
Writing Score on each reference script. Gap is Muse Wonder (max) minus MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on), and the higher score is in bold.
| Script | Muse Wonder (max) | MiMo-V2.6-Pro UltraSpeed (thinking on) | Gap |
|---|---|---|---|
| Script 1 opinion / warning explainer | 81.3 | 79.0 | +2.3 |
| Script 2 news-analysis / skeptical explainer | 81.7 | 80.6 | +1.1 |
| Script 3 personal roadmap / opinion | 81.3 | 80.9 | +0.4 |
| Script 4 short explainer | 79.5 | 78.5 | +1.0 |
| Script 5 news-analysis / opinion explainer | 82.2 | 81.2 | +1.0 |
| Script 6 founder announcement / personal origin story | 81.3 | 81.2 | +0.1 |
| Script 7 personal technical walkthrough / agentic workflow case study | 78.5 | 82.3 | -3.8 |
| Script 8 product release announcement / personal observation | 82.1 | 81.3 | +0.8 |
| Script 9 career guide / hiring analysis | 79.9 | 82.3 | -2.4 |
| Script 10 engineering process walkthrough / presentation adaptation | 78.2 | 78.8 | -0.6 |
Scorecards and Thinking Pages
Each configuration name in the table above opens its own scorecard.
Compare With Another Model
Pick a second model. A pair with its own written match-up opens that page, and any other pair opens in the comparison tool.
Nearby Match-Ups by Best Writing Elo
Every configuration wrote five drafts for each of the same 10 briefs, from the same prompt. Generation was closed-book, with the prompt as the only source and no web search or other tools. Each judge scores every draft once: Claude Opus 5.5 at medium effort through the Claude Code subscription, GPT-6.1 Sol at medium reasoning through the Codex CLI, GLM 5.3 Flash through OpenRouter, and Jev 1.13, a typed judge from TypeSafe that answers each metric as a multiple-choice question. The channel's finished script is their reference for the voice, and it gets no score on the board itself.
← All comparisons