BenchLeader

Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Muse Spark 1.2

Full profiles: Kimi K3.1 Pro (Moonshot AI) and Muse Spark 1.2 (Meta): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 7 sources

As of 24 Oct 2026, Kimi K3.1 Pro and Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) are neck and neck on quality (66.8 vs 63.2 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±7.8 margin of error), and Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) costs 2.0× less, which makes it the better buy for most workloads. Kimi K3.1 Pro leads in every category we measure both in.

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
Agents & tool useKimi K3.1 Pro67 vs 55 category score; AutomationBench 73.3% vs 40.6%High
ReasoningKimi K3.1 Pro81 vs 69 category score; CritPt 24.6% vs 17.7%High
KnowledgeKimi K3.1 Pro75 vs 67 category score; AA-Omniscience 29.5 vs 27.2High
Long documentsKimi K3.1 Pro68 vs 65 category score; AA-LCR 86.3% vs 79.0%Medium
Images and other mediaKimi K3.1 Pro67 vs 65 category scoreMedium
Chat quality (human preference)–Only Muse Spark 1.2 has an Arena rating (69 category score)Not comparable
Lowest costMuse Spark 1.2$2.00 vs $4.00 per 1M blended; agentic coding session $0.092 vs $0.160–
Fastest first answerMuse Spark 1.217.6 s (Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh)) vs 27.7 s (Kimi K3.1 Pro) 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

  • Kimi K3.1 Pro and Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) are neck and neck on quality (66.8 vs 63.2, within the ±7.8 margin).
  • Kimi K3.1 Pro is stronger in agents & tools, composite, knowledge, long context, multimodal, reasoning.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) is stronger in coding, human preference, maths.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) is 2.0× cheaper ($2.00 vs $4.00 per 1M blended).
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) streams 3.8× faster (307 vs 81 tokens per second).

At a glance

SpecKimi K3.1 ProMuse Spark 1.2
DeveloperMoonshot AIMeta
Released23 Oct 20265 Aug 2026
Context window (tokens)1,048,5761,048,576
Compared atKimi K3.1 ProMuse Spark 1.2 (xhigh)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M$2.00 / $10.00 / $0.200$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.

CategoryKimi K3.1 ProMuse Spark 1.2 (xhigh)Leader
Reasoning81.369.3Kimi K3.1 Pro
Coding–55.2not comparable
Agents & tools67.355.0Kimi K3.1 Pro
Maths–67.3not comparable
Knowledge74.866.7Kimi K3.1 Pro
Human preference–68.6not comparable
Multimodal67.065.2Kimi K3.1 Pro
Long context68.364.5Kimi K3.1 Pro
Composite75.873.8Kimi K3.1 Pro

Where sources disagree

Across the 10 benchmarks both have, Kimi K3.1 Pro leads 9, Muse Spark 1.2 leads 1. Every overall index that rates both puts Kimi K3.1 Pro ahead.

Overall indexKimi K3.1 ProMuse Spark 1.2 (xhigh)Leader
BenchLeader Index66.863.2neck and neck
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.255.139.6Kimi K3.1 Pro

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.

MeasureKimi K3.1 ProMuse Spark 1.2 (xhigh)
Blended price per 1M tokens$4.00$2.00
Input / output per 1M$2.00 / $10.00$1.25 / $4.25
Cached input per 1M$0.200$0.150
Price per task: chat reply$0.0038$0.0018
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report$0.030$0.018
Price per task: code edit$0.027$0.014
Price per task: agentic coding session$0.160$0.092
Price per task: structured extraction$0.0060$0.0034
Cost to run a full benchmark suite$2.11$0.975
Output speed81 tok/s307 tok/s
Time to first answer27.7 s17.6 s
Time to a complete answer33.9 s19.2 s

Per token is not per task: on Artificial Analysis' full suite Kimi K3.1 Pro cost $2.11 and Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) $0.975, because Kimi K3.1 Pro used about 1.1× as many tokens for the same work.

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 66.8 and takes 28 s to its first answer token. Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) scores 63.2 and takes 18 s to its first answer token. 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

92 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.

MetricPublisherKimi K3.1 ProMuse Spark 1.2 (xhigh)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader66.863.2
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader67.355.0
Composite scoreBenchLeader75.873.8
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader74.866.7
Long context scoreBenchLeader68.364.5
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader67.065.2
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader81.369.3
Coding scoreBenchLeader–55.2
Human preference scoreBenchLeader–68.6
Maths scoreBenchLeader–67.3
Blended price $/MBenchLeader$4.00$2.00
Output speedBenchLeader81 tok/s307 tok/s
Time to first answerBenchLeader27.7 s17.6 s
Context windowBenchLeader1,048,576 tokens1,048,576 tokens
Reasoning
SimpleBenchSimpleBench–74.5%†
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)–1512
LiveBench 2.0 ReasoningLiveBench91.1%90.0%†
LiveBench 1.0 ReasoningLiveBench–90.0%
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis–90.4%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis52.5%45.5%
CritPtArtificial Analysis24.6%17.7%
Chess PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–27.0%
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–48.4%
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–94.7%
Coding
SciCodeSciCode–57.4%
WeirdMLWeirdML–60.3%
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)–1541
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)–1534
LiveBench 2.0 CodingLiveBench81.8%78.2%†
LiveBench 1.0 CodingLiveBench–77.5%
SciCode (AA)Artificial Analysis60.8%57.4%
IOIVals AI–21.8%
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI–86.6%
Code MigrationVals AI–29.9%
ProgramBenchVals AI–0.5%
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI–79.1%
DeepSWE v1.1Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–54.9%
FrontierSWEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–12.0%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA)Artificial Analysis67.2%7.1%
Show all 92 benchmarks
MetricPublisherKimi K3.1 ProMuse Spark 1.2 (xhigh)
Coding
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis–80.2%
Startrise FrontendStartrise–70.3%†
FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis47.1%–
Agents & tools
APEX-AgentsMercor–45.4%†
Arena AgentArena (LMArena)–-6.8
LiveBench Long AgenticLiveBench49.5%21.3%†
LiveBench BrowserLiveBench80.0%36.0%†
LiveBench Agentic CodingLiveBench–57.6%
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)Vals AI–69.7%
GDPval-AA v2.1Artificial Analysis67.3%–
τ³-Banking (AA)Artificial Analysis–34.9%
CyberBenchVals AI–69.5%
Finance Agent v2Vals AI–60.6%
Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1Vals AI–25.4%
Legal Research BenchVals AI–43.8%
SkillsBenchVals AI–53.0%
SREBenchVals AI–0.0%
Tax Agent BenchVals AI–32.8%
Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals)Vals AI–6.1%
AutomationBenchArtificial Analysis73.3%40.6%
GDP.pdf (AA)Artificial Analysis31.4%17.4%
EnterpriseOps-GymArtificial Analysis–47.3%
AA-Briefcase v1.1Artificial Analysis1678–
CWE-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis60.8%–
DeepSec-Bench (AA)Artificial Analysis36.7%–
CyberGym end-to-end (AA)Artificial Analysis94.7%–
Maths
ProofBenchVals AI–43.0%†
LiveBench MathematicsLiveBench–91.2%
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)–1491
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–60.3%
LiveBench 2.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench79.1%76.5%†
LiveBench ResearchLiveBench77.9%67.7%†
LiveBench 1.0 Data AnalysisLiveBench–76.5%
AA-OmniscienceArtificial Analysis29.527.2
MMLU-ProVals AI–88.3%
LegalBenchVals AI–85.3%
CorpFinVals AI–70.9%
TaxEvalVals AI–80.4%
BioMysteryBenchVals AI–64.8%
Excel Modeling BenchmarkVals AI–57.0%
MedCodeVals AI–49.4%
MedScribeVals AI–90.1%
Public Benefits Bench v1.1Vals AI–68.5%
GDP.pdfEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–16.0%
AA-Omniscience: accuracyArtificial Analysis51.0%45.4%
AA-Omniscience: non-hallucinationArtificial Analysis56.1%66.7%
Instruction following
LiveBench LanguageLiveBench–78.6%
LiveBench Instruction FollowingLiveBench–74.3%
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)–1472
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)–1491
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)–1439
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)–1511
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)–1488
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)–1304
LiveBench DesignLiveBench77.8%67.1%†
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis83.9%–
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI–86.1%
MortgageTaxVals AI–65.4%
SAGEVals AI–47.7%
Long context
AA-LCRArtificial Analysis86.3%79.0%
MLCRArtificial Analysis–7.2%
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–155.1†
LiveBench 2.0LiveBench76.7%62.4%†
LiveBench 1.0LiveBench–78.0%
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis55.139.6
Vals Multimodal IndexVals AI–69.8%†
AA Cyber IndexArtificial Analysis64.1–

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

What changed

  • Kimi K3.1 Pro: BenchLeader Index 65.6 → 66.8.
  • Kimi K3.1 Pro: 5 new results (FrontierCode 1.1 (AA), AA Cyber Index, CWE-Bench (AA)…).
  • Kimi K3.1 Pro: first results.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh): 1 new result (Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1).
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh): 2 score revisions.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh): BenchLeader Index 62.6 → 63.3.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh): 4 new results (AutomationBench, GDP.pdf (AA), MLCR…).
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh): 3 new results (Chess Puzzles, ProgramBench, SREBench); 1 score revision.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh): 3 score revisions.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh): 1 score revision.

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

Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Muse Spark 1.2: questions

Is Kimi K3.1 Pro better than Muse Spark 1.2?
Kimi K3.1 Pro and Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) are neck and neck on quality (66.8 vs 63.2, within the ±7.8 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, Kimi K3.1 Pro or Muse Spark 1.2, and will that change?
Muse Spark 1.2 is cheaper today: $2.00 against $4.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token. No price change has been announced for either.
Is Kimi K3.1 Pro better than Muse Spark 1.2 for agents and tool use?
Kimi K3.1 Pro scores higher in agentic tasks (67 vs 55 on the category index, where 50 is average).
Which is better for long documents?
Kimi K3.1 Pro scores higher on long-context benchmarks (68 vs 65). Both accept 1,048,576 tokens of context.
Which has lower latency?
Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) answers first: 17.6 s against 27.7 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, Kimi K3.1 Pro or Muse Spark 1.2?
Muse Spark 1.2 streams faster: 307 against 81 output tokens per second.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Kimi K3.1 Pro vs Muse Spark 1.2?
Across the 10 benchmarks both have, Kimi K3.1 Pro leads 9, Muse Spark 1.2 leads 1. Every overall index that rates both puts Kimi K3.1 Pro ahead.
When was Kimi K3.1 Pro released?
Kimi K3.1 Pro was released on 23 Oct 2026.