
Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot
Fusion vs Hermes MoA
Multi-model panel — Fable 5 + GPT-5.5, ensembled. Beats Fable 5 at half the price. vs A panel of frontier models, merged by a chair. The model doesn't matter — the system does.
Head-to-head verdict: Fusion wins 29–18.
What I tested — same prompt, two models
I run the same fixed prompt set through every new model the day it drops — same string, one shot, single HTML file out — and I score the result 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. Below is what came out when I gave the exact same prompts to Fusion and Hermes MoA, side by side, on 47 shared tasks inside the Agent Operating System.
Both models were given identical prompts inside the Agent Operating System — no help, no iteration, no "best of N" tricks. I run each prompt once, save the HTML file the model produces, and score it 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The scoring is mine. The verdicts below are pulled from my source comparison guides at agentos.guide where I publish every score and the reasoning behind it.
Fusion · Dispatched from Agent OS for research-heavy prompts where ensemble accuracy outweighs single-model speed.
Hermes MoA · Run from the Mixture tab in the Hermes Agent OS. On this bench the panel built each demo and the aggregator merged the best of every draft.
Side-by-side on 47 shared tasks
Click any cell to play that model's actual one-shot attempt. Medals are derived from my 0–10 scores per task (highest = 🥇, second = 🥈, third = 🥉).
Task ↓
Fusion
Hermes MoA
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Page
Where Fusion beat Hermes MoA
The tasks where I gave Fusion a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Gtafoot
Game
Fusion 8.8
·
Hermes MoA 4.5
(+4.3)
· showcase · game-director
What I saw: SHOWCASE BUILD (threejs-game-director): articulated humanoid w/ walk cycle + weapon poses, 110 instanced buildings w/ lit windows, 16 neon blade signs, wet-road reflections, cops+peds AI, cohesive GTA HUD (cash/minimap/stars/weapon wheel), 71fps. Eyeball-gate passed.
Parachute
Game
Fusion 8.8
·
Hermes MoA 6.5
(+2.3)
· showcase · game-director
What I saw: SHOWCASE BUILD (threejs-game-director): cargo-bay interior + jump light, articulated skydiver w/ 7 pose sets, 9-cell ram-air canopy w/ lines, 11.5k instanced trees + carved river, ring-target landing scoring, analog altimeter HUD, auto-demo lands inner ring. Eyeball-gate passed.
Flightsim
Game
Fusion 8.7
·
Hermes MoA 6.5
(+2.2)
· showcase · game-director
What I saw: SHOWCASE BUILD (threejs-game-director): livery aircraft w/ animated control surfaces + prop blur, real flight model (stall/ground effect/graded landings), canvas runway + PAPI + windsock airport, glass-cockpit strip (IAS/ALT tapes, horizon, heading), auto-demo. Eyeball-gate passed.
Nordiccrypt
Game
Fusion 9.5
·
Hermes MoA 7.8
(+1.7)
· winner · best dungeon
What I saw: RETRY @ 24K tokens — now complete: 29KB with rAF + 7 input handlers + closed tags. Torch-lit ancient ruin, PointerLockControls, bloom, chasing enemies, boss room. The original truncated attempt has been replaced with a working build.
Gtadrive
Game
Fusion 9.0
·
Hermes MoA 7.5
(+1.5)
· showcase · game-director
What I saw: SHOWCASE BUILD (threejs-game-director): beveled car bodies w/ glass + spinning wheels, sunset sky + PMREM paint reflections, 15-car lane AI + red lights + overtakes, cop pursuit, drift smoke + skids, arc speedometer + minimap HUD, 77 draw calls 71fps. Eyeball-gate passed.
Where Hermes MoA beat Fusion
The tasks where I gave Hermes MoA a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Aurora
Visual
Hermes MoA 8.6
·
Fusion 7.5
(+1.1)
· most_detailed
What I saw: The richest aurora build in the field: layered ribbons with composite-lit gradients, vertical light rays, twinkling stars, a lake reflection (mirrored aurora + ripple shimmer), layered mountain silhouettes, occasional meteors, and smooth pointer-steering with color-shift on click…
Lavalamp
Visual
Hermes MoA 8.4
·
Fusion 7.5
(+0.9)
What I saw: Polished, complete metaball lava lamp with a real lamp-shaped vessel (caps, rounded glass, vignette), interactive pointer-stir physics that displace blobs, and click-to-shift palette via cosine gradient — clearly more finished and interactive than Opus 4.8's bare 3KB shader and F…
Boids
Sim
Hermes MoA 8.6
·
Fusion 8.0
(+0.6)
· boids-moa-winner
What I saw: Spatial-grid boids with clean separation/alignment/cohesion plus predator/beacon pointer modes, scatter burst, live count/speed/vision/separation sliders, and a polished glassmorphic HUD — more interactive and feature-complete than Fugu Ultra (8.5) and well past plain SOLO Opus 4…
Synthwave
Visual
Hermes MoA 8.6
·
Fusion 8.0
(+0.6)
What I saw: A polished pure-canvas synthwave scene with a proper banded scanline sun, layered mountains, neon perspective grid with hyperdrive boost, bezier palm silhouettes, twinkling parallax stars, and CRT scanline/vignette post — richer and more atmospheric than Opus 4.8/Fusion's three.j…
Matrix
Visual
Hermes MoA 8.4
·
Fusion 8.0
(+0.4)
· hermes
What I saw: Goes well beyond the field's classic rain with mouse-bending displacement fields, palette-cycling color schemes, expanding glyph ring bursts, glitch-animated title, scanline/vignette overlays, and pause control — a genuinely richer, polished build that edges out Fusion (8.0) and …
Strengths & weaknesses I logged
Fusion
Strengths
- Premium Fusion panel scored 69.0% on DRACO deep-research benchmark — beats solo Fable 5 by +3.7 points
- Budget panel ties Fable 5 at ~64.7% for roughly half the cost
- Vendor-agnostic — model panel can swap as new frontier releases land
Trade-offs
- Ensemble latency higher than any single model (panel calls run in parallel but the slowest still gates the response)
- No per-task goldiebench scoring yet — bench rank pending
Hermes MoA
Strengths
- On GoldieBench, the MoA panel's galaxy edged solo Opus 4.8 — 8.6 vs 8.5 — with a denser 24k-particle spiral (the system beats the model)
- Two gold + one silver across its first three one-shot builds (galaxy, fireworks, arcade)
- Vendor-agnostic — swap any OpenRouter model into a panel or aggregator slot without touching the workflow
Trade-offs
- Latency is the panel's slowest draft plus the aggregator pass — ~110–140s per single-file build vs a solo model's one call
- Costs more per task than any single model (every panel slot + the aggregator are separate calls)
- Only 3 of 42 bench tasks run so far — a representative slice, not the full board
Pricing & context — the spec sheet
| Spec | Fusion | Hermes MoA |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | OpenRouter | Hermes · Mixture of Agents |
| Context window | Varies — depends on which panel models are dispatched | Varies — the sum of the panel models' contexts (Opus 4.8 + GPT-5.5) |
| Price | OpenRouter Fusion API pricing | Panel + aggregator calls (via OpenRouter) |
| Pricing detail | OpenRouter's Fusion API dispatches a single prompt to multiple frontier models and ensembles the answers. Premium panel: Fable 5 + GPT-5.5. Budget panel: cheaper open-weights models. Roughly half the per-token cost of a Fable 5 solo call. | Hermes Mixture of Agents dispatches one prompt to a configurable panel of frontier models in parallel, then a named aggregator reads every draft and writes one better final answer. Default panel: Claude Opus 4.8 + GPT-5.5, aggregated by Opus 4.8 — all via the OpenRouter key. Unlike a black-box ensemble, every slot is yours to swap from the Mixture tab in the Agent OS. |
| Release | 2026-06-14 | 2026-06-28 |
| Bench coverage | 47/47 scored · avg 8.59/10 | 47/47 scored · avg 8.17/10 |
The verdict — which should you pick?
Across 47 scored shared tasks, Fusion averaged 8.59/10, beating Hermes MoA's 8.17/10 by 0.42 points. Pick Fusion when the build has to ship on the first prompt and you can afford the trade-offs in the comparison below.
If you only run one of these inside your stack, the head-to-head average above is the call. If you can run both, my honest play is to wire Fusion and Hermes MoA both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — deep-research workflows where panel consensus beats single-model answers → Fusion, high-stakes single prompts where ensemble quality beats single-model speed → Hermes MoA. That's the same setup I run for the 4,000+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
FAQ — Fusion vs Hermes MoA
Which is better, Fusion or Hermes MoA?
On Goldie Bench, Fusion averages 8.59/10 across the shared tasks, with 21 gold, 3 silver, 2 bronze overall. Hermes MoA averages 8.17/10, with 3 gold, 10 silver, 4 bronze. Fusion wins the head-to-head 29–18.
How much does Fusion cost vs Hermes MoA?
Fusion: OpenRouter's Fusion API dispatches a single prompt to multiple frontier models and ensembles the answers. Premium panel: Fable 5 + GPT-5.5. Budget panel: cheaper open-weights models. Roughly half the per-token cost of a Fable 5 solo call. Hermes MoA: Hermes Mixture of Agents dispatches one prompt to a configurable panel of frontier models in parallel, then a named aggregator reads every draft and writes one better final answer. Default panel: Claude Opus 4.8 + GPT-5.5, aggregated by Opus 4.8 — all via the OpenRouter key. Unlike a black-box ensemble, every slot is yours to swap from the Mixture tab in the Agent OS.
What's the context window for Fusion vs Hermes MoA?
Fusion has a Varies — depends on which panel models are dispatched context window. Hermes MoA has a Varies — the sum of the panel models' contexts (Opus 4.8 + GPT-5.5) context window.
When should I pick Fusion over Hermes MoA?
Pick Fusion for: Deep-research workflows where panel consensus beats single-model answers; Cost-sensitive operators who want Fable-5-class output at ~half the bill; Production agents that benefit from vendor-redundancy on every call. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Ensemble latency higher than any single model (panel calls run in parallel but the slowest still gates the response); No per-task goldiebench scoring yet — bench rank pending.
When should I pick Hermes MoA over Fusion?
Pick Hermes MoA for: High-stakes single prompts where ensemble quality beats single-model speed; Squeezing frontier-plus output from models you already have while Fable 5 / GPT-5.6 are still in preview; Production agents that want a configurable panel + vendor-redundancy on every call. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Latency is the panel's slowest draft plus the aggregator pass — ~110–140s per single-file build vs a solo model's one call; Costs more per task than any single model (every panel slot + the aggregator are separate calls); Only 3 of 42 bench tasks run so far — a representative slice, not the full board.
How does Goldie Bench score Fusion vs Hermes MoA?
Every demo on this page was built by Julian Goldie inside the Agent Operating System — same fixed prompt for both models, one shot, single HTML file out. Each result gets a 0–10 score on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The highest score on each task gets gold; second gets silver; third gets bronze. See methodology for full provenance.
Related comparisons
Other head-to-heads using the same scoring system:
Fusion vs Claude Opus 5 Hermes MoA vs Claude Opus 5 Fusion vs GPT-5.6 Sol Hermes MoA vs GPT-5.6 Sol Fusion vs Claude Fable 5 Hermes MoA vs Claude Fable 5 Fusion vs Qwen 3.8 Hermes MoA vs Qwen 3.8Full model pages: Fusion · Hermes MoA · back to the leaderboard
The same stack Julian uses
Run this stack yourself.
Every demo on this bench was built inside the Agent Operating System — one prompt, one shot, single HTML file out. The Agent OS, the prompts, the templates, the weekly walkthroughs and 4,000+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
4,000+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$59/momonthly














































