DeepSeek-V4-FlashvsMuse Spark 1.3
DeepSeek-V4-Flash | Muse Spark 1.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | — | 1M |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $0.0679DigitalOcean | $1.25Meta |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $0.168DigitalOcean | $4.25Meta |
| BenchmarksPublished by one model only | ||
BullshitBench v2Nonsense detection — Given a confidently-worded but nonsensical prompt, does the AI spot that it makes no sense and push back — instead of playing along and inventing an answer? The score is how often it clearly called out the nonsense. Higher is better. | 18% | — |
DeepSWE 1.1Agentic coding — Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | — | 75.4% |
SWEAtlas CodeBase QnACodebase understanding — Questions about how an unfamiliar codebase actually works — where something is handled, what a change would touch — answered by reading the repository rather than editing it. Tests understanding rather than patch-writing. Higher is better. | — | 59.4% |
LiveCodeBenchCompetitive coding — Coding problems published so recently the AI can't have seen them in training — a contamination-free test of raw programming skill. Higher is better. | 91.6% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | — | 88.8% |
JobBenchProfessional tool use — Tests the AI on professional workplace tasks that require using real work tools — the kind of multi-step jobs an office worker handles. Higher is better. | — | 64.9% |
DeepSearchQAAgentic browsing — Questions that cannot be answered from one page: the AI has to search the web, follow the trail across several sources, and put the pieces together into an answer. Higher is better. | — | 89.4% |
GPQA DiamondScience — Graduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | 88.1% | — |
Agentic IF Index (Internal)Instruction following — Meta's internal measure of whether a model keeps following the instructions it was given while working as an agent — over a long run of tool calls, not just in a single reply. Higher is better. | — | 57.8% |
OSWorld 2.0Agentic computer use — Can the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Version 2.0 is a harder, refreshed task set. Higher is better. | — | 66.9% |
AutomationBenchBusiness workflows — Tests whether the AI can run real multi-step business workflows — the kind of end-to-end office processes companies want to automate — from start to finish. Higher is better. | — | 49.4% |
GDPval-AA v2Knowledge work — economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | — | 1754 |
MRCR · 256k-512kLong context — Tests whether the AI can find specific details buried inside a very long document, here across inputs of roughly 256k to 512k tokens — several books' worth of text. Higher is better. | — | 98.5% |
MRCR · 512k-1MLong context — The same buried-detail retrieval test run on even longer inputs, from roughly 512k up to a million tokens. Scores usually slip as the document grows, so read it against the shorter span above. Higher is better. | — | 98.1% |
| Overview | ||
| Company | DeepSeek | Meta |
| Release date | Apr 24 2026 | Sep 2 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Proprietary |
Other comparisons
DeepSeek-V4-FlashvsClaude Fable 5.1Muse Spark 1.3vsClaude Fable 5.1DeepSeek-V4-FlashvsGPT-6 AstraMuse Spark 1.3vsGPT-6 AstraDeepSeek-V4-FlashvsGemini 3.8 FlashMuse Spark 1.3vsGemini 3.8 FlashDeepSeek-V4-FlashvsGrok 4.6Muse Spark 1.3vsGrok 4.6DeepSeek-V4-FlashvsMistral Medium 3.5Muse Spark 1.3vsMistral Medium 3.5DeepSeek-V4-FlashvsKimi K3Muse Spark 1.3vsKimi K3
Frequently asked questions
DeepSeek-V4-Flash and Muse Spark 1.3 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. DeepSeek-V4-Flash shipped 131 days before Muse Spark 1.3, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
DeepSeek-V4-Flash is open weight, while Muse Spark 1.3 is proprietary.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — DeepSeek-V4-Flash and Muse Spark 1.3 don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.
DeepSeek-V4-Flash was released by DeepSeek on Apr 24 2026.
Muse Spark 1.3 was released by Meta on Sep 2 2026.
DeepSeek-V4-Flash is an open weight model released by DeepSeek. Muse Spark 1.3 is a proprietary model released by Meta.