Compare AI models
| 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 | ||
Input priceWhat you pay for everything you send the model — your question, plus any documents or earlier conversation you include with it. | — | $0.25 |
Output priceWhat you pay for the text the model writes back. It is normally the dearer half: producing an answer costs more than reading one. | — | $2.00 |
Cached input priceA reduced rate for text you send over and over. If every request starts with the same instructions or the same document, the provider keeps a copy ready and charges less to read it again. | — | $0.025 |
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. | $1.25Meta | $0.125OpenAI |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $4.25Meta | $1.00OpenAI |
| Benchmarks | ||
ProgramBenchProgram reconstruction — The AI receives a working program and its documentation, then builds a replacement from scratch without the original source code, internet access or decompilation. The score is the percentage of 200 programs that pass every behavioral test. We record each model's best published mini-SWE-agent result, including higher reasoning efforts where available. Partial test-pass rates and almost-solved programs do not count toward this score. Equal scores share a rank here; the official board also uses partial progress to break ties. Higher is better. | 0% | 0% |
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. | 50% | — |
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. | 59.3% | — |
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. | 82.9% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | OpenAI |
| Release date | Aug 5 2026 | Aug 7 2025 |
| Access | Closed | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Muse Spark 1.2vsClaude Sonnet 5.5GPT-5 minivsClaude Sonnet 5.5Muse Spark 1.2vsGemini 4 ArgonGPT-5 minivsGemini 4 ArgonMuse Spark 1.2vsGrok 4.7GPT-5 minivsGrok 4.7Muse Spark 1.2vsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashGPT-5 minivsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashMuse Spark 1.2vsMistral Medium 3.5GPT-5 minivsMistral Medium 3.5Muse Spark 1.2vsKimi K3GPT-5 minivsKimi K3Frequently asked questions
Muse Spark 1.2 and GPT-5 mini are evenly matched across the 1 benchmark they both report (ProgramBench). Only GPT-5 mini has a verified first-party API price: $0.25 per million input tokens and $2.00 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Muse Spark 1.2. GPT-5 mini shipped 363 days before Muse Spark 1.2, 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 ProgramBench, both models score 0%.