Laguna XS 2.1 vs Muse Wonder 1.0
Poolside · US | Meta · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Laguna XS 2.1 for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters or open weights under openmdw-1.1, shipped day one in bf16, fp8, nvfp4 and int4 across every major runtime. Pick Muse Wonder 1.0 for meta superintelligence labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused muse spark family or artificial analysis intelligence index score of 52 (a gated 'wonder full' subscription variant scores 56, tied with claude sonnet 5.5, behind only opus 5.5 at 58). Choose Laguna XS 2.1 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Muse Wonder 1.0 if you want a managed API.
Laguna XS 2.1 (Poolside) and Muse Wonder 1.0 (Meta) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Laguna XS 2.1 is a 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Muse Wonder 1.0 is meta Superintelligence Labs' October 12, 2026 debut frontier model — distinct from Muse Spark, scoring 52 on the independent Artificial Analysis Index with a 1M-token, four-modality context window. They diverge most on price, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: Laguna XS 2.1 is about 40× cheaper on input ($0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens) — a large enough gap that at scale it can be the single biggest line item in the decision.
- ▸Context window: Muse Wonder 1.0 holds 4× more — 1M tokens (~1,573 pages) vs 256K (~393 pages). But effective recall usually fades long before the advertised ceiling, so the bigger number only helps if the model reasons over it.
- ▸Recency: Muse Wonder 1.0 is the newer model by about 3 months (released October 12, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Laguna XS 2.1 | Muse Wonder 1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Poolside (US) | Meta (US) |
| Released | July 2, 2026 | October 12, 2026 |
| Context window | 256K (~393 pages) | 1M tokens (~1,573 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens | $4/$20 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | Yes — self-hostable | No — API only |
| Modalities | text, code | text, image, video, audio |
| SWE-Bench Verified | 70.9% | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | Not published |
Who wins what
Remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters
Laguna XS 2.1
Muse Wonder 1.0 is comparatively weak here — benchmark comparisons against Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra are Meta's own self-reported figures
Open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime
Laguna XS 2.1
Open weights make this possible at all — Muse Wonder 1.0 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
Cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price
Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Muse Wonder 1.0 ($4/$20 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Meta Superintelligence Labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused Muse Spark family
Muse Wonder 1.0
Laguna XS 2.1 is comparatively weak here — weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score of 52 (a gated 'Wonder Full' subscription variant scores 56, tied with Claude Sonnet 5.5, behind only Opus 5.5 at 58)
Muse Wonder 1.0
Laguna XS 2.1 is comparatively weak here — weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness
78.8% on DeepSWE v1.1 long-horizon coding, ahead of both Claude Opus 5.5 (74.2%) and GPT-6 Astra (74.1%)
Muse Wonder 1.0
Its 1M tokens window holds about 4× more than Laguna XS 2.1's 256K in a single prompt.
Lowest cost at scale
Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Largest single-prompt input
Muse Wonder 1.0
Its 1M tokens window is about 4× larger than Laguna XS 2.1's 256K, fitting roughly 1,573 pages in one prompt.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Laguna XS 2.1
At $0.1/$0.2 per 1M tokens it undercuts Muse Wonder 1.0, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Muse Wonder 1.0
Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ Laguna XS 2.1
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Muse Wonder 1.0 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters
→ Laguna XS 2.1
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is meta superintelligence labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused muse spark family
→ Muse Wonder 1.0
That is its strongest area.
Laguna XS 2.1: where it fits
A 33B open-weight coding MoE running on 3B active parameters — 70.9% SWE-Bench Verified and very cheap, but unproven. Released July 2, 2026 by Poolside, it is built for remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on SWE-Bench Verified from only 3B active parameters, open weights under OpenMDW-1.1, shipped day one in BF16, FP8, NVFP4 and INT4 across every major runtime, cheap even on the paid tier, at roughly a sixth of GLM 4.7's input price, and unusually transparent evaluation — it publishes its harness, step limits, and sandbox specs.
Its trade-offs are real: weeks old with no independent replication; every published score traces back to Poolside's own harness, the free endpoint trains on your inputs and outputs — disqualifying for proprietary code, which is its main use case, and weak on harder agentic work (37.5 on Terminal-Bench 2.0), and its gain over XS.2 is barely above noise. At $0.1 in / $0.2 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget price band.
Muse Wonder 1.0: where it fits
Meta Superintelligence Labs' October 12, 2026 debut frontier model — distinct from Muse Spark, scoring 52 on the independent Artificial Analysis Index with a 1M-token, four-modality context window. Released October 12, 2026 by Meta, it is built for meta Superintelligence Labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused Muse Spark family, artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score of 52 (a gated 'Wonder Full' subscription variant scores 56, tied with Claude Sonnet 5.5, behind only Opus 5.5 at 58), 78.8% on DeepSWE v1.1 long-horizon coding, ahead of both Claude Opus 5.5 (74.2%) and GPT-6 Astra (74.1%), and accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF input against a 1,048,576-token context window.
Its trade-offs: the stronger 'Wonder Full' variant is gated behind $50/$200-per-month Muse Code subscriptions, with no public API or independently verifiable pricing, meta's full safety report had not been published as of launch, first release in a brand-new model family — no track record yet next to Meta's more established Muse Spark line, and benchmark comparisons against Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra are Meta's own self-reported figures. At $4 in / $20 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Laguna XS 2.1 gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Muse Wonder 1.0 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both Laguna XS 2.1 and Muse Wonder 1.0 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Laguna XS 2.1 or Muse Wonder 1.0 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for Muse Wonder 1.0, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Laguna XS 2.1 leans toward remarkable efficiency — 70.9% on swe-bench verified from only 3b active parameters while Muse Wonder 1.0 leans toward meta superintelligence labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused muse spark family, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Laguna XS 2.1 or Muse Wonder 1.0?
Laguna XS 2.1 is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Muse Wonder 1.0 is API-metered at $4/$20 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Wonder 1.0 — 1M tokens vs 256K, about 4× larger. Useful only if the model actually reasons over the full window, which not all do.
Can I use both Laguna XS 2.1 and Muse Wonder 1.0 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Laguna XS 2.1, Muse Wonder 1.0 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Laguna XS 2.1 or Muse Wonder 1.0?
Muse Wonder 1.0 — released October 12, 2026, about 3 months after Laguna XS 2.1.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.