Thinking Levels · Meta
Muse Wonder: Writing Quality by Reasoning Effort
Last updated , from board data generated at 20:08 UTC.
This page compares Muse Wonder at 3 reasoning-effort settings, each tested on the same 10 scripts: the Writing Score (the 0 to 100 consensus of the judges and code), the Writing Elo (a rating from pairwise comparisons of those scores), and the cost and time of each setting. As a model, Muse Wonder ranks #16 of 80 models through its best setting. The other ranks on this page are configuration ranks: one setting's place among all 132 configurations.
What More Effort Changes for Muse Wonder
Max effort lifts Muse Wonder a long way, and most of the gain is length. At max, it lands 341 Elo above high, so max would win about 88% of its script comparisons against high. It also lands 401 Elo above the run with no effort flag, which the board records as adaptive because Meta lets the model pick its own level. The max range sits well clear of the other two. At high and adaptive, the scripts run well past their target length, and at max they land close to it, while the other scores move a few points at most. Against high, that fix costs 2.1 times as much per script and takes 2.0 minutes instead of 0.9.
Recommended Setting
I'd run it at max. That's where Muse Wonder earns its place, at #31 on the whole board, and the scripts come back close to the length you asked for. At high or with no flag, you get about the same voice and substance for $0.149 or $0.139 a script, but you'll be cutting long scripts down by hand.
If you trim by hand anyway, I'd leave the flag off rather than pay for high. Left to pick its own level, the model spends fewer reasoning tokens than at high, but the high setting is only 60 Elo ahead, and their ranges overlap, so the board can't separate them. The adaptive run is also a little cheaper and faster.
One catch: even at max, Muse Wonder is expensive for where it lands. GPT-6 Sol (medium) ranks #14, well above it with no overlap in the ranges, for $0.056 a script and about 0.8 minutes. So I'd run Muse Wonder at max when you want Meta, and look elsewhere when you want the best script for the money.
Every Setting on the Chart
Each point is one effort setting of Muse Wonder, joined from the lowest setting to the highest. Higher and further left is better: a higher score for less money or less time.
How to Use the Chart
- A hollow marker is the provider default: the level the provider applies when the request sets no effort level.
- The tabs choose the score on the vertical axis, X axis switches between cost and time, and Table lists the same numbers as rows.
- Select a point for its numbers and a link to its scorecard.
On a small screen, Table lists the same numbers as rows.
All Effort Settings, Step by Step
| Setting | Writing Elo | Step | Writing Score | Cost / Script | Time / Script | Reasoning Tokens | Configuration Rank |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| high | 1664 ±62 | - | 76.7 | $0.149 | 0.9 min | 1,385 | #58 |
| max | 2005 ±43 | +341 | 80.6 | $0.309 | 2.0 min | 9,601 | #31 |
| adaptive (provider default) | 1604 ±55 | - | 76.2 | $0.139 | 0.8 min | 766 | #70 |
Other Meta Models by Effort
Writing Elo comes from comparing every pair of models on every script, which puts these settings on the same scale as the leaderboard. Step is the Writing Elo change from the previous explicit setting. Cost is one full script at API list prices, and time is the average for one accepted script, retries included. The thinking-levels page covers the other models, and the Meta family page lists every Meta model side by side.