Artificial Analysis 对 Meta 的 Muse Ember 在成本和基准测试方面进行比较

发生了什么

Artificial Analysis 报告称，Meta 的 Muse Ember（max）在 Intelligence Index 上得分为 36，每项任务成本为 $0.14，与 Claude Haiku 5.5（max）的得分相同，后者每项任务成本为 $0.41。Muse Ember 在 AutomationBench-AA 上的得分为 68.1%，在智能体编程任务中的表现参差不齐：它在 Terminal-Bench 4.0 上胜过 Claude Haiku 5.5，但在 FrontierCode 2.0 上落后于它。该帖列出，Muse Ember 可通过 Meta 的第一方 API 和 Muse Code 使用。

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

这件事到目前为止

Meta 发布了用于日常智能体任务的 Muse Ember。Alexandr Wang 表示，Crouton Alpha 是该模型的早期版本。Wang 称，Meta 在发布前修复了问题，并在测试中处理了超过 5 万亿个 token。 Ember 可处理工具调用、小型编码任务、路由、信息提取和长文档处理等任务。它支持文本、图像、音频和视频，上下文窗口最长可达 100 万个 token。开发者可通过 Meta Model API 和 Muse Code 使用该模型，输入价格为每百万个 token 0.10 美元，输出价格为每百万个 token 0.50 美元。 Artificial Analysis 在其 Intelligence Index 上给 Ember (max) 打出 36 分，平均每项任务成本为 0.14 美元；相比之下，Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) 每项任务成本为 0.41 美元。Ember 的编码测试结果不一：它在 Terminal-Bench 4.0 上胜过 Haiku 5.5，但在 FrontierCode 2.0 上得分较低。

Artificial Analysis 对 Meta 的 Muse Ember 在成本和基准测试方面进行比较

发生了什么

接下来读什么

这件事到目前为止

这件事的进展 · 3