- Testers agree it is very cheap and fast: the same animated 3D scene cost $3.09 vs $24.96 on Haiku 5.5, and long browser-agent tasks ran for about 3 cents each.
- Quality lands around Claude Haiku 5.5: it is the top small model in Arena's WebDev ranking and passed all 30 coding tests in one independent suite.
- The main weakness is consistency: rerun the same support task eight times and only about half pass every time, and it claimed success on 48% of the runs it got wrong.
- API only, no open weights. Best used as a cheap subagent next to a stronger model, with checks on critical actions.
- Based on 16 independent tests and evaluations (11 positive, 3 mixed, 2 negative) collected Nov 9 to 11, 2026.
Our hands-on tests
We give every language model the same 6 small tasks through OpenRouter and check the answers automatically. Muse Ember passed 5 of 6; the whole run cost $0.0049. Each task runs once, so treat this as a quick check, not a benchmark.
| Task | Result | Time | Cost |
|---|---|---|---|
| Follow a JSON formatValid JSON; worked out "next Tuesday" as 2026-11-10 | ✓ Pass | 1.9s488 tokens (451 thinking) | $0.0003 |
See the task and answerTask we gave Today is Friday, November 6, 2026. Extract the person's name, their company, and the new meeting date from this message. Reply with only a JSON object with the keys "name", "company" and "date" (date as YYYY-MM-DD). No other text. Message: "Hi, Dana Whitfield here (Northwind Labs). Something came up, so could we push our call to next Tuesday instead? Thanks!" How we checked Valid JSON with exactly these values: Dana Whitfield, Northwind Labs, 2026-11-10 (the Tuesday after Nov 6). Muse Ember's answer {"name": "Dana Whitfield", "company": "Northwind Labs", "date": "2026-11-10"} | |||
| Logic puzzleCorrect: $22 | ✓ Pass | 3.4s1,423 tokens (1,412 thinking) | $0.0007 |
See the task and answerTask we gave A shop sells pens in packs of 4 for $3, packs of 7 for $5, or single pens for $1. What is the lowest possible cost for exactly 30 pens? Put only the dollar amount on the last line, like: $9 How we checked The last line must be $22 (e.g. two 7-packs and four 4-packs). Muse Ember's answer $22 | |||
| Write working codePassed all 9 of our test cases | ✓ Pass | 4.8s2,230 tokens (1,765 thinking) | $0.0011 |
See the task and answerTask we gave Write a Python function calc(expr) that evaluates an integer arithmetic expression string with +, -, *, /, parentheses, unary minus and spaces. Division truncates toward zero (so "-7 / 2" is -3). Do not use eval, exec or any parsing library. Reply with only the code in one ```python block. How we checked We run the code in a sandbox against 9 test cases, including nested parentheses, unary minus and -7 / 2 = -3. All must pass. Muse Ember's answer ```python
def calc(expr):
n = len(expr)
pos = 0
def parse_expression():
nonlocal pos
value = parse_term()
while True:
while pos < n and expr[pos].isspace():
pos += 1
if pos < n and expr[pos] in '+-':
op = expr[pos]
pos += 1
rhs = parse_term()
value = value + rhs if op == '+' else value - rhs
else:
return value
def parse_term():
nonlocal pos
value = parse_factor()
while True:
while pos < n and expr[pos].isspace():
pos += 1
if pos < n and expr[pos] in '*/':
op = expr[pos]
pos += 1
rhs = parse_factor()
if op == '*':
value *= rhs
else:
q = abs(value) // abs(rhs)
value = -q if (value < 0) != (rhs < 0) else q
else:
return value
def parse_factor():
nonlocal pos
while pos < n and expr[pos].isspace():
pos += 1
if pos < n and expr[pos] == '-':
| |||
| Find a fact in ~30K tokensFound the code (4196), hidden 70% of the way in | ✓ Pass | 8.7s3,602 tokens (3,477 thinking) | $0.0019 |
See the task and answerTask we gave A server log of about 950 lines (~30K tokens) with one note hidden 70% of the way in: "NOTE from ops: the vault code for Branch 7 is 4196." The question: "What is the vault code for Branch 7? Reply with only the code." How we checked The answer must contain 4196. Muse Ember's answer 4196 | |||
| Call tools correctlyCalled the tool for one city only in the first turn | ◐ Half | 2.7s914 tokens (812 thinking) | $0.0005 |
See the task and answerTask we gave Tool available: get_weather(city, unit: celsius | fahrenheit). Question: "Is it warmer right now in Lisbon or in Oslo? Use Celsius." How we checked Pass: calls get_weather for both Lisbon and Oslo, in Celsius, in its first reply. Half: only one city. Muse Ember's answer get_weather({"city":"Lisbon","unit":"celsius"}) | |||
| Write to tight constraintsAll 5 rules kept (40 words) | ✓ Pass | 1.8s767 tokens (708 thinking) | $0.0004 |
See the task and answerTask we gave Write a product description for a solar-powered camping lantern for a US online store. Rules: exactly 3 sentences; no more than 40 words; include the exact phrases "USB-C" and "12 hours"; do not use the words "perfect" or "ultimate". Reply with only the description. How we checked All five rules: exactly 3 sentences, at most 40 words, contains "USB-C" and "12 hours", no "perfect" or "ultimate". Muse Ember's answer Illuminate your campsite with this solar-powered lantern, featuring bright LED light and rugged weatherproof design. Recharge via solar panel or USB-C cable for convenient backup power anytime. Enjoy up to 12 hours of reliable glow on a single charge tonight. | |||
Muse Ember via OpenRouter · reasoning effort: max · tested Nov 11, 2026. How we test
What testers found
Based on 16 hands-on tests and reviews we collected (11 positive, 2 negative, 3 mixed). We summarize them in our own words; we did not run these tests ourselves.
| Area | Agreement | What testers report |
|---|---|---|
| Cost | Consistent | Every tester who measured cost found it far cheaper than peers: $3.09 vs $24.96 for the same scene (thehype), about 3 cents per long browser task (Browser Use), $0.14 per Artificial Analysis task. It does write more output tokens than average. |
| Speed | Consistent | Fast per task: 3.1 minutes per Artificial Analysis task, the quickest in its comparison; about 40% faster than GPT-6 Luna in one agent harness. One tester notes it always reasons before answering. |
| Coding and web building | Consistent | Top small model in Arena's WebDev ranking (1608 vs Haiku 5.5 at 1595); all 30 coding tests passed in one suite; one-shot 3D scenes where Luna needed a second prompt. |
| Reliability | Mixed | The clearest weak spot. On repeated τ-bench runs only 27 of 50 tasks passed all eight times, and it wrongly reported success in 48% of failed runs (Haiku 5.5: 31%). Other testers saw a few more failures than Luna or one dropped task; one suite saw zero errors. |
| Agent workflows | Mixed | Strong reports as a cheap worker in browser agents and parallel testing, but the consistency results above matter most for customer-facing agents. |
| Long context, audio and video | Too few tests | Few independent tests yet of its 1M-token context or audio and video input. |
Selected tests
Ran five tasks from sketches, messy data and diagrams: built a working kebab-shop simulator from a drawing in about 41 seconds and found the fault in a hand-drawn circuit, but its name list in 81 languages had duplicates and errors.
“quite a cost-effective small model from Meta”
Built the same animated voxel pagoda with Muse Ember and Claude Haiku 5.5: $3.09 vs $24.96, about 8x cheaper at the same list price.
On its hardest long-horizon browser benchmark, Ember scored 63.9/100, the same as GPT-6 Luna (medium), at about 3 cents a task, 2.4x cheaper.
“Tasks with 100s of browser steps cost CENTS, not USD”
Ranked the highest-performing small model in Code Arena: WebDev with 1608 points, ahead of Claude Haiku 5.5 (1595) and GPT-6 Luna (1578).
Intelligence Index 36, second in its price class (median 24); 3.1 minutes and $0.14 per task, the fastest and cheapest in its comparison chart.
Scored 142/157 (90.4%) on his Cold Iron suite with zero errors and working code on all 30 coding tests, for about five cents. The catch he flags: it always thinks before answering.
In an internal agent eval it failed a few more cases than GPT-6 Luna, but cost about 25% less and finished tasks about 40% faster.
“looks like a good free tier workhorse model”
On τ-bench support tasks both Ember and Haiku 5.5 pass 83% on the first try, but only 27 of 50 tasks passed all eight reruns for Ember, and it claimed success in 24 of 50 failed runs (48%) vs 31% for Haiku.
A personal Japanese-learning project he estimated at about $1,000 in token costs came to about $100 with Ember.
Benchmarks: official vs independent
Do Meta's numbers hold up? We match each published score with the same test run by someone else. 2 of 9 official scores have an independent result so far, as of Nov 11, 2026.
| Benchmark | Meta says | Independent | Verdict |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexMax reasoning. Same score on AA's own model page. | 36 | 36Artificial Analysis Source ↗ | Holds up |
| Terminal-Bench 4.01.5 points lower in Vals AI's run. | 40.9% | 39.4%Vals AI Source ↗ | Holds up |
| AutomationBench-AACredited to Artificial Analysis; not public on AA yet. | 37.8 | Not run yet | Not checked yet |
| Coding Agent Index-AACredited to Artificial Analysis; not public on AA yet. | 46 | Not run yet | Not checked yet |
| FrontierCode 2.0-AACredited to Artificial Analysis; not public on AA yet. | 27.2 | Not run yet | Not checked yet |
| GDP.pdf-AACredited to Artificial Analysis; not public on AA yet. | 22.8 | Not run yet | Not checked yet |
| Agents' Last ExamMeta's own evaluation. | 61.6 | Not run yet | Not checked yet |
| OSWorld 2.1Meta's own evaluation (partial credit). | 69.5 | Not run yet | Not checked yet |
| PerceptionBench (with tools)Meta's own evaluation. | 80.6 | Not run yet | Not checked yet |
Independent results Meta didn't publish
| Benchmark | Result | Tested by |
|---|---|---|
| Vals Index | 60.5% | Vals AI Source ↗ |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | 83.7% | Vals AI Source ↗ |
| Code Arena: WebDevTop small model, ahead of Claude Haiku 5.5 (1595) and GPT-6 Luna (1578). | 1608 | Arena (LMArena) Source ↗ |
| Browser Use, hardest long-horizon setSame as GPT-6 Luna (medium), about 2.4x cheaper per task. | 63.9 / 100 | Browser Use Source ↗ |
| τ-bench, 8 reruns per task83% on the first try, same as Haiku 5.5; less consistent on reruns. | 27 of 50 pass every run | Kritin Vongthongsri Source ↗ |
What is Muse Ember?
Muse Ember is the smallest and cheapest model in Meta’s Muse family, released on November 9, 2026. Meta built it for “the work agents repeat all day”: tool calls, coding subtasks, routing, extraction and parsing long documents. The idea is that a bigger model plans the job and Muse Ember does the many small steps, cheaply and fast.
Key facts from Meta’s announcement:
- Multimodal input: text, images, audio and video in; text out. OpenRouter also lists PDF documents as input.
- 1M-token context window and up to 512K output tokens.
- Reasoning model with adjustable reasoning effort (Meta’s charts show medium, high, xhigh and max settings).
- It is the first model Meta trained using Muse Wonder Full, its largest model.
- Model ID:
muse-ember-1.0. It supports the Responses API.
Muse Ember pricing
| Prompts up to 200K tokens | Prompts over 200K tokens | |
|---|---|---|
| Input | $0.10 / 1M tokens | $0.30 / 1M tokens |
| Cached input | $0.004 / 1M tokens | $0.012 / 1M tokens |
| Output | $0.50 / 1M tokens | $1.50 / 1M tokens |
For comparison inside Meta’s own lineup, Muse Spark 1.3 costs $1.25 / $4.25 and Muse Wonder $4 / $20 per million input / output tokens (OpenRouter list prices). So Ember’s input is more than 12 times cheaper than Spark’s.
Meta’s headline number is cost per task: about $0.14 per Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index task, against $2.39 for Muse Spark 1.3, which scores only one point higher (37 vs 36).
Muse Ember benchmarks
All figures below are from Meta’s announcement, with every model at max reasoning effort. Results marked “AA” come from Artificial Analysis; the others are Meta’s own evaluations.
| Benchmark | Muse Ember | Claude Haiku 5.5 | GPT-6 Luna |
|---|---|---|---|
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index | 36 | 36 | 28 |
| AutomationBench-AA (business workflows) | 37.8 | 13.9 | 20.2 |
| Agents’ Last Exam | 61.6 | 57.0 | 57.1 |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 | 40.9 | 39.2 | 16.4 |
| Coding Agent Index-AA | 46 | 37 | 31 |
| FrontierCode 2.0-AA | 27.2 | 34.9 | 25.2 |
| GDP.pdf-AA (long documents) | 22.8 | 20.8 | 22.8 |
| OSWorld 2.1 (computer use, partial credit) | 69.5 | 68.9 | 50.5 |
| PerceptionBench (with tools) | 80.6 | 78.6 | 62.8 |
What this means in practice:
- Same overall score as Haiku 5.5, far cheaper per task. On Meta’s chart, Ember at max effort scores 35.8 for about $0.136 per task; Haiku 5.5 at max scores 36.2 for about $0.411.
- Biggest lead on agent workflows (AutomationBench-AA), which is exactly the job Meta designed it for.
- Not a clean sweep. Haiku 5.5 is clearly ahead on FrontierCode 2.0, which judges whether real engineering changes are good enough to merge. If your work is mostly writing production code, test both.
How well do these numbers hold up? So far two have been re-run by third parties and both match closely. See Benchmarks: official vs independent above.
Is Muse Ember open source / open weights?
No. This is one of the most searched questions, so to be clear: as of November 10, 2026, Muse Ember is API-only. There is no Muse Ember repository on Hugging Face, and Meta has not published its size.
If you need an open-weight Meta model, OpenRouter lists two in the Muse family:
- Muse Spark Open: an open-weight model tuned for agentic coding.
- Muse Glimmer 30B: a dense 30B open-weight multimodal model distilled from Muse Spark, aimed at consumer hardware (131K context).
How to use Muse Ember
There is no free consumer chat for Ember mentioned in Meta’s announcement. It is aimed at developers, and you can reach it in five ways:
- Meta Model API: sign up at dev.meta.ai and call
muse-ember-1.0. Meta says the API works with OpenAI-SDK-compatible clients, so you mostly change the base URL, key and model name. - OpenRouter: use the model ID
meta/muse-ember. Handy if you already route models through OpenRouter or use a coding agent that supports it. - Muse Code: Meta’s terminal coding agent, on a subscription.
- Google Cloud: available as a partner model.
- Oracle Cloud: Meta says the Muse models are available there as well.
The setup Meta recommends: let Muse Wonder (or Muse Spark) plan, and hand the high-volume steps (file reads, test runs, small fixes, extraction) to Ember as a subagent.
Who should use it?
- Agent builders paying for many small model calls: routing, classification, extraction, tool calls.
- Coding agent users who want a cheap subagent next to a stronger main model.
- Document and media pipelines: one model reads text, images, audio and video with a 1M context.
It is probably not your best pick as the only model for hard, open-ended reasoning or merge-ready feature work. Meta itself positions Muse Wonder for that.
What we don’t know yet
- Parameter count and architecture
- Whether an open-weight version will follow
- Rate limits and any free tier on Meta Model API
- Independent results on more benchmarks beyond Artificial Analysis and Vals AI
We will update this page as Meta and independent testers publish more.
FAQ
Is Muse Ember open weights?
No. As of November 10, 2026, Muse Ember is only offered through APIs (Meta Model API, Muse Code, OpenRouter, Google Cloud and Oracle Cloud). There are no Muse Ember weights on Hugging Face. Meta's open-weight models in the Muse family are Muse Spark Open and Muse Glimmer 30B.
How much does Muse Ember cost?
$0.10 per million input tokens, $0.004 per million cached input tokens and $0.50 per million output tokens for prompts up to 200K tokens. Longer prompts cost $0.30, $0.012 and $1.50 respectively.
How big is Muse Ember?
Meta has not published a parameter count. It only describes Muse Ember as its smallest and most efficient model.
Is Muse Ember better than Claude Haiku 5.5?
On Meta's published results it scores the same as Claude Haiku 5.5 (max) on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (36 each) at about a third of the cost per task, and wins most agent and coding benchmarks. Haiku 5.5 is ahead on FrontierCode 2.0.
What is the Muse Ember model ID?
muse-ember-1.0 on Meta Model API, and meta/muse-ember on OpenRouter.
Sources
Update log
- Nov 10, 2026 Page published from Meta's announcement, developer page and OpenRouter.
- Nov 11, 2026 Added 15 independent tests and evaluations with a summary by area.
- Nov 11, 2026 Added an official-vs-independent benchmark check: 2 of 9 Meta scores confirmed so far.
- Nov 11, 2026 Added our own hands-on tests (6 tasks run through OpenRouter, checked automatically) and a YouTube hands-on review.