BenchLeader

Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.3

Full profiles: Grok 4.6 (SpaceXAI) and Muse Spark 1.3 (Meta): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 7 sources

As of 24 Oct 2026, Grok 4.6 (medium) and Muse Spark 1.3 (max) are neck and neck on quality (64.2 vs 67.1 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±6.2 margin of error), and Muse Spark 1.3 (max) costs 1.5× less, which makes it the better buy for most workloads. Pick Grok 4.6 for agents & tools (74 vs 66); pick Muse Spark 1.3 for reasoning (77 vs 64).

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
CodingMuse Spark 1.365 vs 62 category score; SciCode 58.8% vs 55.9%Medium
Agents & tool useGrok 4.674 vs 66 category score; τ³-Banking (AA) 44.3% vs 50.5%High
ReasoningMuse Spark 1.377 vs 64 category score; CritPt 24.9% vs 17.7%High
KnowledgeGrok 4.674 vs 73 category score; AA-Omniscience 28 vs 25Medium
Long documentsMuse Spark 1.367 vs 66 category score; AA-LCR 83.0% vs 81.0%Medium
Chat quality (human preference)–Only Muse Spark 1.3 has an Arena rating (69 category score)Not comparable
Lowest costMuse Spark 1.3$2.00 vs $3.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.092 vs $0.144–
Fastest first answerGrok 4.625.5 s (Grok 4.6 (medium)) vs 90.1 s (Muse Spark 1.3 (max)) to the first answer token–
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Grok 4.6 (medium) and Muse Spark 1.3 (max) are neck and neck on quality (64.2 vs 67.1, within the ±6.2 margin).
  • Grok 4.6 (medium) is stronger in agents & tools, knowledge.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max) is stronger in coding, composite, long context, reasoning, human preference, maths, multimodal.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max) is 1.5× cheaper ($2.00 vs $3.00 per 1M blended).
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max) streams 1.4× faster (116 vs 84 tokens per second).

At a glance

SpecGrok 4.6Muse Spark 1.3
DeveloperSpaceXAIMeta
Released11 Aug 20262 Sept 2026
Context window (tokens)500,0001,048,576
Compared atGrok 4.6 (medium)Muse Spark 1.3 (max)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$2.00 / $6.00 / $0.500$1.25 / $4.25 / $0.150

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryGrok 4.6 (medium)Muse Spark 1.3 (max)Leader
Reasoning64.477.4Muse Spark 1.3
Coding62.364.5Muse Spark 1.3
Agents & tools73.565.6Grok 4.6
Maths–63.4not comparable
Knowledge74.172.8Grok 4.6
Human preference–69.1not comparable
Multimodal–65.7not comparable
Long context65.666.6Muse Spark 1.3
Composite77.483.3Muse Spark 1.3

Where sources disagree

Across the 15 benchmarks both have, Grok 4.6 leads 4, Muse Spark 1.3 leads 9 and 2 are tied. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Spark 1.3 ahead.

Overall indexGrok 4.6 (medium)Muse Spark 1.3 (max)Leader
BenchLeader Index64.267.1neck and neck
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.242.848.1Muse Spark 1.3
Arena Text1456†1496Muse Spark 1.3

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page; suite cost is what Artificial Analysis paid to run its whole Intelligence Index.

MeasureGrok 4.6 (medium)Muse Spark 1.3 (max)
Blended price per 1M tokens$3.00$2.00
Input / output per 1M$2.00 / $6.00$1.25 / $4.25
Cached input per 1M$0.500$0.150
Price per task: chat reply$0.0026$0.0018
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.028$0.018
Price per task: code edit$0.021$0.014
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.144$0.092
Price per task: structured extraction$0.0052$0.0034
Cost to run a full benchmark suite$1.14$1.60
Output speed84 tok/s116 tok/s
Time to first answer25.5 s90.1 s
Time to a complete answer31.4 s94.4 s

Per token is not per task: on Artificial Analysis' full suite Grok 4.6 (medium) cost $1.14 and Muse Spark 1.3 (max) $1.60, because Muse Spark 1.3 (max) used about 2.1× as many tokens for the same work, which a per-token price hides.

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Grok 4.6 (medium) scores 64.2 and takes 25 s to its first answer token; Grok 4.6 (high) scores 62.9 in 25 s, Grok 4.6 (xhigh) scores 62.5 in 28 s. Muse Spark 1.3 (max) scores 67.1 and takes 90 s to its first answer token; Muse Spark 1.3 (xhigh) scores 64.9 in 30 s, Muse Spark 1.3 scores 59.8 in 3 s. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

121 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherGrok 4.6 (medium)Muse Spark 1.3 (max)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader64.267.1
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader73.565.6
Coding scoreBenchLeader62.364.5
Composite scoreBenchLeader77.483.3
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader74.172.8
Long context scoreBenchLeader65.666.6
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader64.477.4
Human preference scoreBenchLeader–69.1
Maths scoreBenchLeader–63.4
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader–65.7
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$3.00$2.00
Output speedBenchLeader84 tok/s116 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader25.5 s90.1 s
Context windowBenchLeader500,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub94.0%†–
SimpleBenchSimpleBench75.9%†–
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)1482†1517
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench91.2%†89.7%†
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench90.5%†89.7%†
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis93.5%93.5%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis42.1%48.7%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI94.7%†–
ARC-AGI-1ARC Prize87.5%–
ARC-AGI-2ARC Prize61.3%–
ARC-AGI-3ARC Prize2.1%†–
CritPtArtificial Analysis17.7%24.9%
MysteryMechanismVals AI30.6%†36.0%
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub33.0%†37.0%
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub34.0%†25.0%
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub48.5%†53.9%†
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub97.3%†96.5%†
ForecastBenchForecastBench65.5%†–
BTF-3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–14.1%†
Coding
SciCodeSciCode55.9%58.8%
WeirdMLWeirdML67.3%†–
FrontierCodeCognition48.0%†–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)1510†1536
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)1617†1657
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench89.1%†90.2%†
Show all 121 benchmarks
MetricPublisherGrok 4.6 (medium)Muse Spark 1.3 (max)
Coding
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench76.8%†81.1%†
LiveCodeBenchVals AI88.2%†–
IOIVals AI47.6%†56.6%
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI95.6%†–
Code MigrationVals AI44.6%†47.4%
ProgramBenchVals AI1.0%†2.5%
SWE-bench MultimodalVals AI–43.1%
Vibe Code Bench 1-100Vals AI14.8%†20.5%
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI76.2%†85.9%
DeepSWE v1.1Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub67.5%–
CursorBenchCursor36.1%41.6%
ALE-BenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub1508.1†1688.3†
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub25.3%†25.8%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis13.1%33.3%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis84.3%84.3%
Startrise FrontendStartrise72.1%†74.7%†
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis–40.6%
Agents & tools
Terminal-BenchTerminal-Bench20.3%†14.6%†
APEX-AgentsMercor65.3%†47.6%
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)0.7†3.4
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench40.7%†40.4%†
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench64.0%†80.0%†
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench57.0%†64.1%†
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI78.3%†79.0%
HiL-BenchScale AI SEAL–66.9%†
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis44.3%50.5%
ITBench SRE (AA)Artificial Analysis–33.2%
Analyst Agent (AA)Artificial Analysis41.3%†37.5%
CUA-benchVals AI–5.8%
CyberBenchVals AI67.7%†72.7%
Finance Agent v2Vals AI53.7%†60.0%
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI15.8%†23.8%
Legal Research BenchVals AI48.1%†55.3%
SkillsBenchVals AI55.8%†–
SREBenchVals AI–3.8%
Tax Agent BenchVals AI33.1%†42.4%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI17.2%†24.8%
Terminal-Bench ScienceVals AI11.4%†10.0%
Time Horizon Index: KSPVals AI5.8%†–
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs9047.0†–
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis63.1%57.9%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis17.8%26.6%
Harvey LAB-AA v1.1Harvey–8.9%
EnterpriseOps-GymArtificial Analysis48.3%†–
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis1531†1581
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis6.2%†10.9%
Maths
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub66.0%†74.0%
FrontierMath Tier 4Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub31.7%†46.3%
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub97.8%†99.2%†
ProofBenchVals AI51.0%†58.0%
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench92.6%†96.0%†
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)1445†1510
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub49.3%†–
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench75.3%†79.6%†
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench84.5%†68.6%†
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench73.9%†79.6%†
AA-OmniscienceArtificial Analysis2825
MMLU-ProVals AI89.4%†–
LegalBenchVals AI86.3%†–
CorpFinVals AI66.2%†–
TaxEvalVals AI71.1%†–
PRBench FinanceScale AI SEAL–59.5%†
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL–61.6%†
BioMysteryBenchVals AI72.2%†–
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI62.7%†67.4%
MedCodeVals AI44.7%†–
MedScribeVals AI86.5%†–
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI66.8%†–
DrugDiscoveryBenchScale AI SEAL–62.2%†
EBR-benchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub30.5%†–
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub16.0%†27.6%†
AA-Omniscience: accuracyArtificial Analysis41.9%43.6%
AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis76.0%67.1%
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench83.7%†82.8%†
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench71.9%†78.0%†
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)1452†1485
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)1456†1496
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)1443†1463
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)1448†1494
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)1475†1497
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)1263†1308
LiveBench DesignLiveBench79.8%†74.8%†
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis–82.0%†
MortgageTaxVals AI64.2%†–
SAGEVals AI28.9%†–
Blueprint-Bench 2Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub33.2%†–
AA-3DArtificial Analysis–1037
Long context
AA-LCRArtificial Analysis81.0%83.0%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1461†1468
MLCRArtificial Analysis18.3%13.9%
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub156.6†157.2†
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench74.9%†74.8%†
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench78.0%†81.6%†
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis42.848.1
Vals RSI IndexVals AI25.5%†19.6%
Vals Science IndexVals AI38.1%†–

Data as of 2026-10-24. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

What changed

  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max): 3 new results (Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1, Vals RSI Index, SWE-bench Multimodal); 1 score revision.
  • Grok 4.6 (medium): 1 new result (MLCR).
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max): 1 score revision.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max): 1 score revision.
  • Grok 4.6 (medium): 15 new results (AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2, GPQA Diamond (AA), Humanity's Last Exam (AA)…).
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max): 2 new results (ProgramBench, SREBench); 1 score revision.
  • Grok 4.6 (medium): 1 score revision.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max): 2 new results (APEX-Agents, FrontierSWE); 1 score revision.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max): BenchLeader Index 68.0 → 67.5.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 (max): 1 new result (Analyst Agent (AA)); 1 score revision.

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.3: questions

Is Grok 4.6 better than Muse Spark 1.3?
Grok 4.6 (medium) and Muse Spark 1.3 (max) are neck and neck on quality (64.2 vs 67.1, within the ±6.2 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 2026-10-24, so check the category scores for your use.
Which is cheaper, Grok 4.6 or Muse Spark 1.3, and will that change?
Muse Spark 1.3 is cheaper today: $2.00 against $3.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Is Grok 4.6 better than Muse Spark 1.3 for coding?
Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher in coding (65 vs 62 on the category index, where 50 is average). On SciCode, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 55.9% for Grok 4.6 against 58.8% for Muse Spark 1.3.
Is Grok 4.6 better than Muse Spark 1.3 for agents and tool use?
Grok 4.6 scores higher in agentic tasks (74 vs 66 on the category index, where 50 is average). On τ³-Banking (AA), the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 44.3% for Grok 4.6 against 50.5% for Muse Spark 1.3.
Which is better for long documents?
Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher on long-context benchmarks (67 vs 66). Muse Spark 1.3 accepts more context: 1,048,576 against 500,000 tokens for Grok 4.6.
Which has lower latency?
Grok 4.6 (medium) answers first: 25.5 s against 90.1 s to the first answer token, as Artificial Analysis measures it. Reasoning effort drives most of this: a higher setting thinks longer before it answers.
Which is faster, Grok 4.6 or Muse Spark 1.3?
Muse Spark 1.3 streams faster: 116 against 84 output tokens per second.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.3?
Across the 15 benchmarks both have, Grok 4.6 leads 4, Muse Spark 1.3 leads 9 and 2 are tied. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Spark 1.3 ahead.
When was Muse Spark 1.3 released?
Muse Spark 1.3 was released on 2 Sept 2026.