STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD

All comparisons ↗

Muse Wonder vs Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Muse Wonder leads Qwen3.6-35B-A3B by 36.2 points on StealthMark, 57.0 to 20.8. It leads on all 9 benchmarks. Muse Wonder scores higher on Newton's Mirror, with its largest category advantage in state at 600 ms.

See the difference ↘
All results ↗
All results ↗

Overall StealthMark

57.0/100Overall rank 10/53
20.8/100Overall rank 46/53

General Intelligence

53.1/100
12.7/100

Visual Intelligence

64.0/100
34.0/100

Reasoning efficiency

On every task, result quality and reasoning tokens are each compared with all measured models and weighed equally. Each dot is one model.

Single-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens on a single problem

Multi-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens across connected steps, as in agentic workflows

Open or local

Local modelOpen model · Apache-2.0

BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK

Where each model leads

  • Muse Wonder
  • Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
  • Other models
  • Median

DATASHEET

Specs and pricing

Muse Wonder scores higher on StealthMark. Qwen3.6-35B-A3B is 13× cheaper per output token. Both take about 1M tokens of context.

  • Muse Wonder
  • Qwen3.6-35B-A3B
  • Other models
  • Median
PricePer 1M output tokens, input below
Muse Wonder: $20$4 inputQwen3.6-35B-A3B: $1.4913× cheaper$0.25 input
Context windowTokens per request, max output below
Muse Wonder: 1MTiedQwen3.6-35B-A3B: 1.01MTied64K max output
Output speedTokens per second, our measurement
Muse Wonder: 570Tiedtokens/sQwen3.6-35B-A3B: 577Tiedtokens/s
SizeTotal and active parameters
Muse Wonder: Not disclosedQwen3.6-35B-A3B: 35B3B active
Developer
MetaQwen
Released
12 Oct 202616 Apr 2026
Origin
United StatesChina
Input → output
Text, image, video, audio, PDF → textText, image, video → text
Architecture
Not publishedMoE causal language model with vision encoder; Gated DeltaNet + gated attention; 256 experts, 8 routed + 1 shared active

Full datasheets, every price and sourceMuse Wonder ↗Qwen3.6-35B-A3B ↗

Anticipating threats and planning ahead. Collect coins while avoiding ghosts. Ghosts move before the player each turn, and collisions cost a life. 3 levels in sequence, up to 66 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.

Muse Wonder 52.3/100Rank 17/47

Survived 0 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 311 ptsTurn 17 / 20

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B 20.7/100Rank 40/47

Survived 1 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 39 ptsTurn 20 / 20

Points per level

LevelMuse WonderQwen3.6-35B-A3B
Level 1Second Thoughts
16 ptsOut of lives
4 ptsOut of lives
Level 2Pressure Pot
10 ptsOut of lives
3 ptsOut of lives
Level 3Hide or Flight
11 ptsOut of lives
9 ptsSurvived

Cooperative planning and learning from experience. Coordinate two robots to push numbered cores onto matching sockets. Pressure plates hold doors open; moving either robot uses one turn. 5 levels in sequence, up to 152 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.

Muse Wonder 67.0/100Rank 17/48

Cleared 5 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 520.6 ptsTurn 27 / 40

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B 3.6/100Rank 44/48

Cleared 1 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 57.8 ptsTurn 36 / 40

Points per level

LevelMuse WonderQwen3.6-35B-A3B
Level 1Hold the door
5.2 ptsCleared
5.2 ptsCleared
Level 2Crossfeed
9 ptsCleared
1 ptsOut of turns
Level 3Relay vault
18.8 ptsCleared
0.2 ptsFinished early
Level 4Passing bay
17.8 ptsClearedFinished early · 1 beacon left
3 ptsOut of turns
Level 5Second thoughts
20.6 ptsCleared
7.8 ptsFinished early

Newton's Mirror

Same task instructions

Physics, perspective and recursive reflections, tested together. Explore the test ↗

The judgment

Muse Wonder

The flattened cyan cap, separate airborne black blob and crimson droplets support much of the contact sequence, although crimson adhesion and forward carriage remain unresolved. Main-sphere placement is broadly compatible with the prescribed view. Sparse isolated mirror images replace the defining repeated room structure and curved nested reflections. The crimson mass is visibly oversized, and the top-center lamp image is missing.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

The artwork demonstrates rounded volume, recognizable paint colors and a compact black feature at an appropriate screen height. The enlarged main-sphere framing, unsupported crimson and cyan interaction histories, oversized compact paint balls and largely missing mirror structure remain substantial weaknesses. The core assessment is 20/170; with no demonstrated floor damage, the combined assessment remains 20/180.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse WonderQwen3.6-35B-A3B
State at 600 ms22.0/252.5/25
Camera and placement12.0/154.0/15
Reflections21.5/1203.5/120
Materials and scale7.5/102.5/10
Floor-damage reward0.0/100.0/10

Benchmark task

A spinning metal sphere and paint in a mirrored room test physical reasoning, perspective and consistency across repeated reflections.

Selfie

Different task instructions

Visual construction and creative interpretation.

The judgment

Muse Wonder

An appealing, coherent cartoon with a readable effortful expression and clear forefeet gripping the trunk. Soft colours and controlled contours support its tenderness. Smooth ears, stiff foreleg construction, limited surface texture and uncertain seed contact keep the execution below intricate illustration quality.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

An appealing fantasy illustration with coordinated ornament, readable suspension and luminous turquoise accents. Plausible limb attachments and soft shading support competent execution. Bear-like proportions, unclear paw gestures, insufficient white robe fabric, crowded chest details and shallow material modeling limit its finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse WonderQwen3.6-35B-A3B
Task & likeness7.5/106.0/10
Anatomy & construction7.0/106.0/10
Space & placement7.5/106.5/10
Light & reflections7.0/107.0/10
Purposeful detail7.5/106.5/10
Artistry & character6.5/106.0/10
Materials & effects6.5/105.5/10
Visual integrity8.0/107.5/10

Benchmark task

Muse Wonder

A small elephant protecting a delicate seed tests expressive anatomy, physical contact and contrasting organic materials.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

A floating capybara in ornate robes tests character anatomy, layered fabric and the placement of surrounding luminous forms.

Mona Lisa

Different task instructions

Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.

The judgment

Muse Wonder

A competent illustrative interpretation with controlled curves, readable details and coherent depth layers. Facial, hair and garment shading demonstrate more development than basic construction. Replication remains limited by the frontal pose, elongated face and pronounced smile; crowded fingers, weak contact shadows and smooth materials constrain anatomical and painterly conviction.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

A recognizable but basic geometric interpretation. Muted colors and soft shading provide cohesion, while weak likeness, unresolved hands, rigid anatomy and shallow landscape construction substantially limit the replication.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse WonderQwen3.6-35B-A3B
Task & likeness5.5/102.0/10
Anatomy & construction5.5/101.0/10
Space & placement5.5/102.0/10
Light & reflections5.5/100.5/10
Purposeful detail5.5/101.5/10
Artistry & character5.5/101.5/10
Materials & effects5.0/101.5/10
Visual integrity6.5/102.0/10

Benchmark task

An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.

Beach

Different task instructions

Creativity, perspective and visual beauty.

The judgment

Muse Wonder

A lively beach illustration with expressive animals, controlled colour transitions and unusually readable accessories. Connected graphic forms make the activities recognizable. Crowded overlaps, compressed depth, schematic joints, weak directional shadows and limited material variation constrain its physical coherence and refinement.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

A recognizable beach sunset with balanced framing and appealing color transitions. Birds, boats and small animals fulfill the main scene requirements. Elementary anatomy, faint details, weak grounding and rigid reflection columns limit depth and finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse WonderQwen3.6-35B-A3B
Task & likeness8.5/107.5/10
Anatomy & construction6.0/104.5/10
Space & placement6.5/105.5/10
Light & reflections6.5/104.5/10
Purposeful detail9.0/104.5/10
Artistry & character7.0/104.5/10
Materials & effects6.0/105.5/10
Visual integrity7.0/105.0/10

Benchmark task

A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.

Ground Truth

Same task instructions

Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.

The judgment

Muse Wonder

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

Benchmark task

A plank, computer mouse and blueberry in a steel room test physical stability, spatial relationships, materials and lighting.

Raccoon

Different task instructions

Scene composition and interacting subjects.

The judgment

Muse Wonder

An expressive, coherent cartoon demonstrates the requested riding and steering interaction. Clean contours, differentiated accessories and energetic spray support its appeal. Concealed seated contacts, compressed vehicle perspective and weak directional lighting limit physical resolution despite the detailed presentation.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

Clean shapes, cheerful faces and bright colors make the riding arrangement readable. The dog does not visibly operate the control, while awkward limbs, shallow hull placement and stiff poses limit credibility. Gradients and layered foam add modest volume and motion. The obscured tail attachment does not establish detachment.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse WonderQwen3.6-35B-A3B
Task & likeness7.5/104.5/10
Anatomy & construction5.5/103.5/10
Space & placement6.5/105.5/10
Light & reflections4.5/103.5/10
Purposeful detail7.5/104.5/10
Artistry & character5.5/104.0/10
Materials & effects7.0/104.0/10
Visual integrity7.0/103.5/10

Benchmark task

A jet-ski scene pairs a canine driver with a raccoon passenger. It tests the placement and contact of interacting subjects, along with vehicle construction.

Pelican

Different task instructions

Subject construction and spatial relationships.

The judgment

Muse Wonder

A controlled, expressive seaside illustration with a distinctive pelican, coherent bicycle geometry and successfully resolved graphic detail. Visible pedal support and plausible occlusion strengthen the riding construction. Aligned wheels and layered scenery establish placement. Limited cast shadows, simplified leg articulation and restrained material modeling constrain its physical finish.

Qwen3.6-35B-A3B

A cheerful, readable illustration with a distinctive pelican silhouette, clean contours and an orderly landscape. Soft glow and restrained shading provide modest atmosphere. Construction is weaker: the handlebar is disconnected, wings do not reach the controls, and overlapping legs leave pedaling ambiguous. Simple forms and mostly flat materials limit depth and drawing sophistication.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse WonderQwen3.6-35B-A3B
Task & likeness8.5/107.0/10
Anatomy & construction6.0/103.5/10
Space & placement7.5/106.0/10
Light & reflections5.5/105.5/10
Purposeful detail8.5/107.0/10
Artistry & character7.5/105.0/10
Materials & effects6.0/105.5/10
Visual integrity8.0/104.5/10

Benchmark task

A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.