Muse Spark 1.2vsGPT-5.6 Luna
Muse Spark 1.2 | GPT-5.6 Luna | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Context window | 1M | — |
| Benchmarks | ||
Nonsense detection BullshitBench v2Given 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. | — | 40% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 1Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. Gray Swan's indirect prompt injection benchmark measures how often such an attack succeeds when the attacker gets a single try. Lower is better. | — | 8.3% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 10Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. This variant gives the attacker 10 tries and counts an attack as successful if any of them works. Lower is better. | — | 38.6% |
Prompt injection robustness Gray Swan IPI · k = 15Attackers hide malicious instructions inside content the AI reads — a web page, an email, a document — and try to hijack what it does. This variant gives the attacker 15 tries and counts an attack as successful if any of them works. Lower is better. | — | 43.9% |
Agentic coding CursorBench v3.2Cursor's own test of harder, real-world coding tasks inside a code editor, on the refreshed v3.2 task set. Scores aren't comparable with v3.1. Higher is better. | — | 61.1% |
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. | 59.3% | — |
Agentic computer work Frontier-Bench v0.1A hard, ever-evolving set of real computer tasks — coding, system administration, data work, and more — that an AI agent has to complete on its own. Run by the Harbor / Laude Institute team as the successor to Terminal-Bench (v0.1 is the first release of the task set). The score is the share of tasks solved. Higher is better. | — | 14.3% |
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. | 82.9%Best | 82.5% |
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. | — | 1523 |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | OpenAI |
| Release date | Aug 5 2026 | Jun 26 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Which is better: Muse Spark 1.2 or GPT-5.6 Luna?
Muse Spark 1.2 leads GPT-5.6 Luna on 1 of the 1 benchmark they both report (Terminal-Bench 2.1). GPT-5.6 Luna shipped 40 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 Terminal-Bench 2.1, Muse Spark 1.2 leads at 82.9% vs GPT-5.6 Luna at 82.5%.
Frequently asked questions
Muse Spark 1.2 was released by Meta on Aug 5 2026.
GPT-5.6 Luna was released by OpenAI on Jun 26 2026.
Muse Spark 1.2 leads on Terminal-Bench 2.1 — Muse Spark 1.2 82.9% vs GPT-5.6 Luna 82.5%.
Other comparisons
Muse Spark 1.2vsClaude Opus 5GPT-5.6 LunavsClaude Opus 5Muse Spark 1.2vsGemini 3.6 FlashGPT-5.6 LunavsGemini 3.6 FlashMuse Spark 1.2vsGrok 4.5GPT-5.6 LunavsGrok 4.5Muse Spark 1.2vsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731GPT-5.6 LunavsDeepSeek-V4-Flash-0731Muse Spark 1.2vsMistral Medium 3.5GPT-5.6 LunavsMistral Medium 3.5Muse Spark 1.2vsKimi K3GPT-5.6 LunavsKimi K3