Skip to content

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Muse Ember

Claude Haiku 5.5

Anthropic

70#110
vs
Muse Ember

meta

40#147
Signal-by-Signal Comparison
SignalClaude Haiku 5.5DeltaMuse Ember
Capabilities
100
--
100
Pricing
100
--
100
Context window size
95
0
96
Recency
100
--
100
Output Capacity
82
-14
96
Overall Result
0 wins
of 5
2 wins
Muse Ember wins 2 of 5 signals

Score History

Score History (6 data points)
Claude Haiku 5.5Muse Ember
Claude Haiku 5.5

69.9

current score

Leader

Claude Haiku 5.5

right now

Muse Ember

40

current score

LMMarketCap.com
Interactive Price Comparison
100Kcalls/month
1,000tokens (~1,333 chars)
500tokens (~667 chars)

Claude Haiku 5.5

Anthropic

Per request$0.000350
Daily$1.17
Monthly$35.00
Annual$420.00

Muse Ember

meta

Per request$0.000350
Daily$1.17
Monthly$35.00
Annual$420.00
Claude Haiku 5.5 pricing:
Input:$0.10/M tokens
Output:$0.50/M tokens
Muse Ember pricing:
Input:$0.10/M tokens
Output:$0.50/M tokens
Winner
Claude Haiku 5.5

Anthropic

70

Composite Score

Muse Ember

meta

40

Composite Score

Signal-by-Signal Comparison
MetricClaude Haiku 5.5Muse EmberWinner
Overall Score
70
40
Claude Haiku 5.5
Rank#110#147
Claude Haiku 5.5
Quality Rank#110#147
Claude Haiku 5.5
Adoption Rank#110#147
Claude Haiku 5.5
Parameters------
Context Window1000K1049K
Muse Ember
Pricing$0.10/$0.50/M$0.10/$0.50/M--
Signal Scores
Capabilities
100
100
Claude Haiku 5.5
Pricing
100
100
Claude Haiku 5.5
Context window size
95
96
Muse Ember
Recency
100
100
Claude Haiku 5.5
Output Capacity
82
96
Muse Ember
Benchmark Head-to-Head(1 benchmarks)
Claude Haiku: 0Muse Ember: 0
Claude Haiku
Muse Ember
Normalized 0-100%
HLE
30.12%-
Benchmark Interpretation

Our score (0-100) is driven by benchmark performance (90%) from Arena Elo ratings, MMLU, GPQA, HumanEval, SWE-bench, and 15+ standardized evaluations. Capabilities and context window serve as tiebreakers (10%). Learn more about our methodology.

Claude Haiku 5.5Competitive

Scores 70/100 (rank #110), placing it in the top 62% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100
Muse EmberEntry Level

Scores 40/100 (rank #147), placing it in the top 50% of all 290 models tracked.

Raw Quality0/100
Cost Efficiency0/100
Speed0/100

Claude Haiku 5.5 has a 30-point advantage, which typically translates to noticeably stronger performance on complex reasoning, code generation, and multi-step tasks.

When to Use Each Model

Choose Claude Haiku 5.5 when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving

Choose Muse Ember when you need:

  • Step-by-step reasoning and chain-of-thought problem solving
Cost-Performance Analysis
Claude Haiku 5.5Best Value
Input cost$0.10/M tokens
Output cost$0.50/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.009
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$9.00
Muse Ember
Input cost$0.10/M tokens
Output cost$0.50/M tokens
Cost per quality point$0.015
Est. monthly (1M tokens/day)$9.00

Both models are priced similarly, so the decision comes down to quality and features rather than cost.

Latency & Speed
Claude Haiku 5.5Faster
Speed score0/100
Muse Ember
Speed score0/100

Both models have comparable response speeds. For most applications, the latency difference is negligible.

When latency matters most: Interactive chatbots, IDE code completion, real-time translation, and user-facing applications where response time directly impacts experience. For batch processing, background summarization, or offline analysis, latency is less critical.

Example Use Cases

Code generation & review

Based on overall model capabilities and architecture for coding tasks like generating functions, debugging, and refactoring

Claude Haiku 5.5

Customer support chatbot

Suitable for user-facing chat with competitive response times. Claude Haiku 5.5 also offers lower per-token costs for high-volume support

Claude Haiku 5.5

Long document analysis

Larger context window (1049K tokens) can process longer documents, contracts, and research papers in a single pass

Muse Ember

Batch data extraction

Lower output pricing ($0.50/M) reduces costs when processing thousands of records daily

Claude Haiku 5.5

Creative writing & content

Higher overall composite score (70/100) correlates with better nuance, coherence, and style in long-form content

Claude Haiku 5.5

Image understanding & OCR

Supports vision input - can analyze screenshots, diagrams, photos, and scanned documents directly

Claude Haiku 5.5
Which Should You Choose?
Our recommendation:
Claude Haiku 5.5

Claude Haiku 5.5 clearly outperforms Muse Ember with a significant 29.900000000000006-point lead. For most general use cases, Claude Haiku 5.5 is the stronger choice. However, Muse Ember may still excel in niche scenarios.

Claude Haiku 5.5
Recommended

by Anthropic

  • Choose for Quality - Marginally better benchmark scores; both are excellent
  • Choose for Cost - 0% lower pricing; better value at scale
  • Choose for Reliability - Higher uptime and faster response speeds
  • Choose for Prototyping - Stronger community support and better developer experience
  • Choose for Production - Wider enterprise adoption and proven at scale

by meta

Consider for specialized use cases.

Capability Comparison
CapabilityClaude Haiku 5.5Muse Ember
Vision (Image Input)
Function Calling
Streaming
JSON Mode
Reasoning
Web Search
Image Output
Monthly Cost Calculator
1,000tokens (600 in / 400 out)
100requests/day (3,000/month)

Claude Haiku 5.5

Anthropic

$0.7800
estimated monthly cost

Muse Ember

meta

$0.7800
estimated monthly cost

Assumes 60% input / 40% output token ratio per request. Actual costs may vary based on your usage pattern.

Parameters & Context
ParameterClaude Haiku 5.5Muse Ember
Context Window1M1.0M
Max Output Tokens128,000943,718
Open SourceNoNo
CreatedOct 7, 2026Nov 9, 2026
Last updated: 30m ago

相关对比

Claude Haiku 5.5 vs Muse Ember (2026) | LM Market Cap