Anthropic's Claude model for demanding reasoning and long-horizon agentic work, released as the successor to Fable 5.1. It costs less than 5.1 on input, output and cache, at the same context window; Anthropic points most workloads to the cheaper Opus 5.5.
pick it if
Opus 5.5 at higher effort still falls short on your evals
you run Fable 5.1 today and want lower rates on the same window
you run long agent sessions; cache hits bill at 2.5% of input
skip it if
Opus 5.5 covers your workload at half the per-token price
your code forces tool use, prefills replies, sets temperature or edits earlier turns; all return errors
Meta's Muse Wonder 1.0 is a multimodal reasoning model for long-horizon agent and software work, released October 2026 as the tier above Muse Spark 1.3 on Meta's Model API. its higher-capability variant, Muse Wonder Full, is offered only in paid Muse Code plans.
pick it if
you want Meta's top api model for multi-step agent tasks
you mix video, audio or PDF input with text in long contexts
you resend long prompts: cached input bills at $0.20 per million
skip it if
Muse Spark 1.3 at $1.25 / $4.25 handles your workload
you need open weights or a cheaper train-on-data tier
faq
which is cheaper, Claude Fable 5.2 or Muse Wonder 1.0?
Muse Wonder 1.0 lists lower input and output prices. on a coding-agent session (2M tokens in, 60,000 out) Claude Fable 5.2 costs $18.40 and Muse Wonder 1.0 $9.20.
can i switch between Claude Fable 5.2 and Muse Wonder 1.0 mid-task?
yes. in an octomind session, /model octohub:claude-fable-5-2 and /model octohub:muse-wonder-1.0 switch models without losing the conversation, so you can draft on one and review on the other.
try either model
switch between models inside the same octomind session.