Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.1
Claude Sonnet 4.6 
Muse Spark 1.1 Verdict
- Muse Spark 1.1 leads on quality: 65.0 vs 60.4.
- Claude Sonnet 4.6 is stronger in long context, maths.
- Muse Spark 1.1 is stronger in agents & tools, coding, composite, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, multimodal, reasoning.
- Muse Spark 1.1 is 3.0× cheaper ($2.00 vs $6.00 per 1M blended).
- Muse Spark 1.1 streams 4.6× faster (194 vs 42 tokens per second).
| Metric | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 60.4 | 65.0 |
| Agents & tools score | 54.6 | 62.7 |
| Coding score | 57.1 | 68.1 |
| Composite score | 67.5 | 72.3 |
| Human preference score | 62.0 | 66.3 |
| Instruction following score | 56.9 | 77.8 |
| Knowledge score | 62.3 | 73.2 |
| Long context score | 66.6 | 65.4 |
| Maths score | 62.7 | 52.2 |
| Multimodal score | 60.6 | 65.0 |
| Reasoning score | 65.2 | 69.2 |
| Blended price $/M | $6.00 | $2.00 |
| Output speed | 42 tok/s | 194 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 2.2 s | 2.6 s |
| Context window | 1M | 1.0M |
| GPQA Diamond | 87.4% | – |
| OTIS Mock AIME | 85.8% | – |
| SWE-bench Verified (Epoch) | 75.2% | – |
| SimpleQA Verified | – | 57.8% |
| Terminal-Bench | 53.4% | – |
| SciCode | – | 58.2% |
| APEX-Agents | – | 41.9% |
| FrontierCode | 24.3% | – |
| ProofBench | – | 39.0% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 152.3 | 154.6 |
| LMArena Text | 1472 | 1492 |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1504 | 1511 |
| LMArena Coding | 1528 | 1531 |
| LMArena WebDev | 1521 | 1541 |
| LMArena Vision | 1282 | 1293 |
| LMArena Agent | -1 | -2.6 |
| AA Intelligence Index | 30.4 | 34.3 |
| IFBench | 56.6% | – |
| AA-LCR | 80.0% | 77.7% |
| MMMU-Pro | 73.3% | – |
| AA-Omniscience | 12.2 | 28.1 |
| Terminal-Bench Hard | 53.0% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | 87.5% | 89.8% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | 33.6% | 46.2% |
| SciCode (AA) | 50.1% | 58.8% |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | 79.5% | – |
| AIME (Vals) | 92.3% | – |
| LiveCodeBench | 82.1% | – |
| MMLU-Pro | 87.3% | – |
| LegalBench | 82.1% | – |
| CorpFin | 65.3% | – |
| TaxEval | 77.1% | – |
| MedQA | 92.1% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals) | 57.3% | – |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | 77.4% | – |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | 85.6% | – |
| Vals Index | 50.6 | – |
| SWE-Bench Pro | – | 61.5% |
| MCP Atlas | 69.5% | 88.1% |
| MultiChallenge | – | 75.3% |
| PRBench Finance | – | 55.0% |
| PRBench Legal | – | 57.0% |
| MultiNRC | – | 65.6% |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1207 | 1260 |
Data as of 2026-09-10. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.1: questions
- Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 better than Muse Spark 1.1?
- Muse Spark 1.1 leads on quality: 65.0 vs 60.4. The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Muse Spark 1.1 is ahead overall as of 2026-09-10, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 better than Muse Spark 1.1 for coding?
- Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher in coding (68 vs 57 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 better than Muse Spark 1.1 for agentic tasks?
- Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher in agentic tasks (63 vs 55 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Muse Spark 1.1?
- Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper: $2.00 against $6.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Muse Spark 1.1?
- Muse Spark 1.1 streams faster: 194 against 42 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Muse Spark 1.1 accepts more context: 1.0M against 1M tokens.