Muse Spark 1.3vsGPT-4o
Muse Spark 1.3 | GPT-4o | |
|---|---|---|
| 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 | 128k |
| 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. | — | $2.50 |
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. | — | $10.00 |
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. | — | $1.25 |
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. | — | $2.50Azure |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across third-party providers, excluding the lab itself. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $10.00Azure |
| 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. | — | 12% |
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% | — |
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. | — | 49.9% |
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 | Meta | OpenAI |
| Release date | Sep 2 2026 | May 13 2024 |
| Access | Proprietary | Proprietary |
Other comparisons
Muse Spark 1.3vsClaude Fable 5.1GPT-4ovsClaude Fable 5.1Muse Spark 1.3vsGemini 3.8 FlashGPT-4ovsGemini 3.8 FlashMuse Spark 1.3vsGrok 4.6GPT-4ovsGrok 4.6Muse Spark 1.3vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813GPT-4ovsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Muse Spark 1.3vsMistral Medium 3.5GPT-4ovsMistral Medium 3.5Muse Spark 1.3vsKimi K3GPT-4ovsKimi K3
Frequently asked questions
Muse Spark 1.3 and GPT-4o don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only GPT-4o has a verified first-party API price: $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Muse Spark 1.3. GPT-4o shipped 842 days before Muse Spark 1.3, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Muse Spark 1.3) vs 128k (GPT-4o).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Muse Spark 1.3 and GPT-4o don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.
Muse Spark 1.3 was released by Meta on Sep 2 2026.
GPT-4o was released by OpenAI on May 13 2024.
Only GPT-4o has a verified first-party API price: $2.50 per million input tokens and $10.00 per million output tokens. No pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Muse Spark 1.3. Rates are pay-as-you-go API prices verified on August 18, 2026.
Muse Spark 1.3 has a 1M context window; GPT-4o has 128k.