Muse Spark 1.1vsGLM-5.3
Muse Spark 1.1 | GLM-5.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 743B |
| Benchmarks | ||
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 61.5% | — |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.1Artificial 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. | 53.3% | 66.9%Best |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 3.0command-line task completion (v3.0, much harder task set) | — | 28.3% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 80% | — |
Multi-step tool use MCP AtlasCan the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | 88.1% | — |
Professional tool use JobBenchTests 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. | 54.7% | — |
Personal tool use Toolathlon-VerifiedTests how well the AI uses everyday personal tools and apps to get things done — a human-checked version of Toolathlon. Higher is better. | 75.6% | — |
Cybersecurity CyberGymTests the AI on cybersecurity challenges — finding and exploiting software weaknesses inside a safe sandbox. Higher is better. | — | 84.5% |
Cybersecurity ExploitBenchA 'capability ladder' for security research, built by CMU researchers: the AI is given known bugs in Chrome's V8 engine and scored on how far it gets toward a working exploit inside a research sandbox — from understanding the patch to triggering a crash. Higher is better. | — | 54.4% |
Cybersecurity ExploitGym · 6-hour budgetCan an AI agent turn a known software vulnerability into a working attack in a controlled lab? Built by MPI-SP researchers, the score is how many of 898 real cases (userspace programs, the V8 engine, the Linux kernel) it cracks — here with a 6-hour compute budget per case. Higher is better. | — | 130 |
Cybersecurity ExploitGym · 2-hour budgetCan an AI agent turn a known software vulnerability into a working attack in a controlled lab? Built by MPI-SP researchers, the score is how many of 898 real cases (userspace programs, the V8 engine, the Linux kernel) it cracks — here with a 2-hour compute budget per case. Higher is better. | — | 105 |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 62.1% | 62.5%Best |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 80.8% | — |
Agentic computer use Agent's Last ExamA hard set of desktop and operating-system tasks an AI agent has to finish by looking at the screen and working the machine itself. The score is the share it passes outright — partial credit does not count. Higher is better. | — | 28.5% |
Business workflows AutomationBenchTests 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. | — | 48.2% |
Agentic financial analysis Finance Agent v2Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | 57.2% | — |
Agentic legal work Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkHarvey's test of whether an AI agent can complete real legal work — drafting and reviewing documents, working with spreadsheets and presentations, and navigating files the way a lawyer's assistant would. Higher is better. | 20% | — |
Tax questions TaxEval v2A set of real tax questions created by Vals AI — can the AI give accurate answers about tax rules and filings? Higher is better. | 79.72% | — |
Medical admin work MedScribeCan the AI support doctors with their administrative work, like notes and paperwork? Created by Vals AI. Higher is better. | 88.89% | — |
Knowledge work GDPval-AA v2economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | — | 1769 |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 88.4% | — |
Visual reasoning BabyVisionTests core visual reasoning — seeing and understanding images the way even young children can, which AIs often find surprisingly hard. Higher is better. | 76.3% | — |
Community preference Arena Elo (Text)Real people chat with two anonymous AIs side by side and vote for the answer they prefer. Votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai — it measures which AI people actually like, not test scores. Higher is better. | 1490 | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1540 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | Z.ai |
| Release date | Jul 9 2026 | Aug 14 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: Muse Spark 1.1 or GLM-5.3?
GLM-5.3 leads Muse Spark 1.1 on 2 of the 2 benchmarks they both report (DeepSWE 1.1, Humanity's Last Exam). Muse Spark 1.1 shipped 36 days before GLM-5.3, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Published specifications for these two models are limited — see each model page for the latest details.
On DeepSWE 1.1, GLM-5.3 leads at 66.9% vs Muse Spark 1.1 at 53.3%. On Humanity's Last Exam · with tools, GLM-5.3 leads at 62.5% vs Muse Spark 1.1 at 62.1%.
Frequently asked questions
Muse Spark 1.1 was released by Meta on Jul 9 2026.
GLM-5.3 was released by Z.ai on Aug 14 2026.
GLM-5.3 leads on DeepSWE 1.1 — Muse Spark 1.1 53.3% vs GLM-5.3 66.9%.
GLM-5.3 leads on Humanity's Last Exam · with tools — Muse Spark 1.1 62.1% vs GLM-5.3 62.5%.
Other comparisons
Muse Spark 1.1vsClaude Opus 5GLM-5.3vsClaude Opus 5Muse Spark 1.1vsGPT-5.6-CyberGLM-5.3vsGPT-5.6-CyberMuse Spark 1.1vsGemini 3.7 FlashGLM-5.3vsGemini 3.7 FlashMuse Spark 1.1vsGrok 4.6GLM-5.3vsGrok 4.6Muse Spark 1.1vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813GLM-5.3vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Muse Spark 1.1vsMistral Medium 3.5GLM-5.3vsMistral Medium 3.5