Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersThe learned values that shape how a model responds. B means billion and T means trillion. For mixture-of-experts models, the total count is larger than the number active for each token. Parameter count alone does not measure quality. | 816B | — |
Context windowHow much information the model can work with in one request, measured in tokens — pieces of words or other data. This includes your question, attachments, conversation and reply. Limits can vary by model variant and provider. | 1M | 400k |
| 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. | — | $12.50 |
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. | — | $75.00 |
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 every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | $1.25BaseTen | — |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | $4.25BaseTen | — |
| $463Modal | $6,250OpenAI list price | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
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. | 60% | — |
Next.js EvalsNext.js coding — Vercel's open eval of how well AI coding agents build and migrate real Next.js apps — measured as the share of tasks the agent completes successfully. Higher is better. | 93% | — |
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. | 76.4% | — |
MCP AtlasMulti-step tool use — Can the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | 89.2% | — |
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. | 61.8% | — |
Advanced Cybersecurity Completion Rate (Internal)Agentic tasks — share of advanced cyber requests the model responds to; measures willingness to answer, not exploit success | — | 95% |
GDPval-AA v2Knowledge work — economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | 1401 | — |
ZeroBench (tools, pass@5)Visual reasoning — percentage of 100 visual problems solved at least once in five attempts with tools | 50% | — |
SimpleVQA (with tools)Visual reasoning — accuracy on 2,024 English and Chinese visual questions with tools | 73.6% | — |
BabyVision (with tools)Visual reasoning — mean accuracy on 388 visual reasoning questions with tools | 80.2% | — |
HLE-Diamond (no tools)Reasoning — accuracy on the 1,000-question HLE-Diamond reasoning and knowledge subset without tools | 26.1% | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | OpenAI |
| Release date | Oct 15 2026 | Aug 10 2026 |
| Access | Open Weight | Closed |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Muse Spark OpenvsClaude Fable 5.2GPT-5.6 CybervsClaude Fable 5.2Muse Spark OpenvsGemini 4 CarbonGPT-5.6 CybervsGemini 4 CarbonMuse Spark OpenvsGrok 4.7GPT-5.6 CybervsGrok 4.7Muse Spark OpenvsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017GPT-5.6 CybervsDeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Muse Spark OpenvsMistral Large 4GPT-5.6 CybervsMistral Large 4Muse Spark OpenvsKimi K3.1 ProGPT-5.6 CybervsKimi K3.1 ProFrequently asked questions
Muse Spark Open and GPT-5.6 Cyber don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Only GPT-5.6 Cyber has a verified first-party price for an available API: $12.50 per million input tokens and $75.00 per million output tokens. No currently available pay-as-you-go API rate is tracked for Muse Spark Open. GPT-5.6 Cyber shipped 66 days before Muse Spark Open, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Context windows are 1M (Muse Spark Open) vs 400k (GPT-5.6 Cyber). Muse Spark Open is open weight, while GPT-5.6 Cyber is closed.
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Muse Spark Open and GPT-5.6 Cyber don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.