Muse Spark vs Muse Wonder Full
Full profiles: Muse Spark (Meta) and Muse Wonder Full (Meta): every benchmark, price and rank.
Updated · Data from 5 sources
As of 24 Oct 2026, Muse Spark and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (64.3 vs 70.7, inside the ±9.2 margin of error) and close on price, so pick on the category that matters to you. Muse Wonder Full leads in every category we measure both in.
Muse Spark benchmarks 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 case | Pick | Why | Confidence |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | Muse Wonder Full | 72 vs 65 category score; Vibe Code Bench v1.1 86.0% vs 19.7% | Medium |
| Reasoning | Muse Wonder Full | 95 vs 65 category score; CritPt 32.9% vs 11.3% | High |
| Knowledge | Muse Wonder Full | 71 vs 63 category score; AA-Omniscience 30.1 vs 7.2 | High |
| Long documents | Muse Wonder Full | 67 vs 64 category score; AA-LCR 83.7% vs 78.0% | Medium |
| Chat quality (human preference) | – | Only Muse Spark has an Arena rating (68 category score) | Not comparable |
| High volume on a budget | Neither flagship | A smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs | – |
Key differences
- Muse Spark and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (64.3 vs 70.7, within the ±9.2 margin).
- Muse Spark is stronger in agents & tools, human preference, instruction following, maths, multimodal.
- Muse Wonder Full (max) is stronger in coding, composite, knowledge, long context, reasoning.
At a glance
| Spec | Muse Spark | Muse Wonder Full |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Meta | Meta |
| Released | 8 Apr 2026 | 12 Oct 2026 |
| Context window (tokens) | 262,144 | 1,000,000 |
| Compared at | Muse Spark | Muse Wonder Full (max) |
| Open weights | No | No |
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.
| Category | Muse Spark | Muse Wonder Full (max) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reasoning | 65.3 | 94.9 | Muse Wonder Full |
| Coding | 65.0 | 72.3 | Muse Wonder Full |
| Agents & tools | 66.1 | – | not comparable |
| Maths | 59.1 | – | not comparable |
| Knowledge | 63.3 | 71.4 | Muse Wonder Full |
| Instruction following | 77.3 | – | not comparable |
| Human preference | 68.3 | – | not comparable |
| Multimodal | 64.5 | – | not comparable |
| Long context | 64.0 | 67.0 | Muse Wonder Full |
| Composite | 64.5 | 91.9 | Muse Wonder Full |
Where sources disagree
Across the 10 benchmarks both have, Muse Spark leads 2, Muse Wonder Full leads 8. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Wonder Full ahead.
| Overall index | Muse Spark | Muse Wonder Full (max) | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 64.3 | 70.7 | neck and neck |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | 31.3 | 55.8 | Muse Wonder Full |
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).
Every benchmark
91 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.
| Metric | Publisher | Muse Spark | Muse Wonder Full (max) |
|---|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | BenchLeader | 64.3 | 70.7 |
| Agents & tools score | BenchLeader | 66.1 | – |
| Coding score | BenchLeader | 65.0 | 72.3 |
| Composite score | BenchLeader | 64.5 | 91.9 |
| Human preference score | BenchLeader | 68.3 | – |
| Instruction following score | BenchLeader | 77.3 | – |
| Knowledge score | BenchLeader | 63.3 | 71.4 |
| Long context score | BenchLeader | 64.0 | 67.0 |
| Maths score | BenchLeader | 59.1 | – |
| Multimodal score | BenchLeader | 64.5 | – |
| Reasoning score | BenchLeader | 65.3 | 94.9 |
| Context window | BenchLeader | 262,144 tokens | 1,000,000 tokens |
| Reasoning | |||
| GPQA Diamond | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 89.8% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam | Scale AI / CAIS | 40.6% | – |
| Arena Hard Prompts | Arena (LMArena) | 1506 | – |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 88.4% | – |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 40.7% | 53.6% |
| GPQA Diamond (Vals) | Vals AI | 89.7% | – |
| CritPt | Artificial Analysis | 11.3% | 32.9% |
| MysteryMechanism | Vals AI | – | 35.1% |
| Coding | |||
| SciCode | SciCode | 51.5% | – |
| Arena Coding | Arena (LMArena) | 1529 | – |
| Arena WebDev | Arena (LMArena) | – | 1726 |
| SciCode (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 62.6% |
| IOI | Vals AI | – | 79.8% |
| SWE-bench (Vals) | Vals AI | 74.4% | – |
| SWE-Bench Pro | Scale AI SEAL | 55.0% | – |
| Code Migration | Vals AI | – | 61.0% |
| Code Migration v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 62.8% |
| ProgramBench | Vals AI | – | 0.5% |
| SWE-bench Multimodal | Vals AI | – | 47.3% |
| Vibe Code Bench 1-100 | Vals AI | – | 34.0% |
| Vibe Code Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | 19.7% | 86.0% |
| SWE-Bench Pro (private) | Scale AI SEAL | 55.0% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA | Scale AI SEAL | 24.2% | – |
| SWE Atlas: Test Writing | Scale AI SEAL | 31.1% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 57.1% |
Show all 91 benchmarks
| Metric | Publisher | Muse Spark | Muse Wonder Full (max) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Coding | |||
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 62.2% | – |
| FrontierCode 1.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 44.9% |
| Agents & tools | |||
| Terminal-Bench Hard | Artificial Analysis | 45.5% | – |
| τ²-Bench Telecom (AA) | Artificial Analysis | 91.5% | – |
| MCP Atlas | Scale AI SEAL | 82.2% | – |
| GDPval-AA v2.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 67.8% |
| CyberBench | Vals AI | – | 73.6% |
| Finance Agent v2 | Vals AI | – | 59.1% |
| Finance Agent v2.1 | Vals AI | – | 67.6% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 23.3% |
| Harvey's Legal Agent Benchmark v1 | Vals AI | – | 21.7% |
| Legal Research Bench | Vals AI | – | 53.4% |
| Robo-bench | Vals AI | – | 10.4% |
| SREBench | Vals AI | – | 11.8% |
| Tax Agent Bench | Vals AI | – | 43.0% |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals) | Vals AI | 59.5% | – |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Vals) | Vals AI | – | 58.1% |
| Terminal-Bench Science | Vals AI | – | 37.1% |
| AutomationBench | Artificial Analysis | – | 71.3% |
| GDP.pdf (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 32.6% |
| Harvey LAB-AA v1.1 | Harvey | – | 13.1% |
| AA-Briefcase v1.1 | Artificial Analysis | – | 1729 |
| Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA) | Artificial Analysis | – | 37.1% |
| Maths | |||
| OTIS Mock AIME | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 88.9% | – |
| ProofBench | Vals AI | 17.0% | – |
| AIME (Vals) | Vals AI | 96.9% | – |
| Arena Maths | Arena (LMArena) | 1467 | – |
| Knowledge | |||
| AA-Omniscience | Artificial Analysis | 7.2 | 30.1 |
| MMLU-Pro | Vals AI | 87.3% | – |
| LegalBench | Vals AI | 84.2% | 87.4% |
| CorpFin | Vals AI | 65.1% | – |
| TaxEval | Vals AI | 77.7% | – |
| PRBench Finance | Scale AI SEAL | 52.4% | – |
| PRBench Legal | Scale AI SEAL | 52.3% | – |
| MultiNRC | Scale AI SEAL | 59.0% | – |
| BioMysteryBench | Vals AI | – | 73.3% |
| CaseLaw v2 | Vals AI | 63.1% | – |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark | Vals AI | – | 71.9% |
| Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 75.0% |
| MedCode | Vals AI | 51.3% | 49.9% |
| MedScribe | Vals AI | 85.9% | 89.3% |
| Public Benefits Bench v1.1 | Vals AI | – | 73.8% |
| AA-Omniscience: accuracy | Artificial Analysis | 49.6% | 43.2% |
| AA-Omniscience: non-hallucination | Artificial Analysis | 15.8% | 77.0% |
| Instruction following | |||
| IFBench | Artificial Analysis | 75.9% | – |
| MultiChallenge | Scale AI SEAL | 75.5% | – |
| TutorBench | Scale AI SEAL | 68.5% | – |
| Arena Instruction Following | Arena (LMArena) | 1465 | – |
| Human preference | |||
| Arena Text | Arena (LMArena) | 1489 | – |
| Arena Creative Writing | Arena (LMArena) | 1464 | – |
| Arena Multi-turn | Arena (LMArena) | 1494 | – |
| Arena Longer Queries | Arena (LMArena) | 1476 | – |
| Multimodal | |||
| Arena Vision | Arena (LMArena) | 1306 | – |
| MMMU-Pro | Artificial Analysis | 80.5% | – |
| MMMU-Pro (official) | MMMU | 80.4%† | – |
| MMMU-Pro (Vals) | Vals AI | 87.4% | – |
| Long context | |||
| AA-LCR | Artificial Analysis | 78.0% | 83.7% |
| Arena Document | Arena (LMArena) | 1467 | – |
| Composite | |||
| Epoch Capabilities Index | Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub | 152.0 | – |
| AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2 | Artificial Analysis | 31.3 | 55.8 |
| Vals Index | Vals AI | – | 66.8 |
| Vals Finance Index | Vals AI | – | 64.5% |
| Vals RSI Index | Vals AI | – | 24.4% |
| Vals Science Index | Vals AI | – | 48.5% |
| Vals Router Index | Vals AI | – | 66.8%† |
| Safety & honesty | |||
| FORTRESS | Scale AI SEAL | 20.2% | – |
Data as of 2026-10-24. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
What changed
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (AA)).
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 9 new results (Code Migration v1.1, Excel Modeling Benchmark v1.1, Finance Agent v2.1…).
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (FrontierCode 1.1 (AA)).
- Muse Wonder Full (max): BenchLeader Index 68.6 → 70.7.
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (Arena WebDev); 2 score revisions.
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 21 new results (IOI, LegalBench, Vals Index…).
- Muse Spark: 1 new result (PRBench Legal).
- Muse Wonder Full (max): 1 new result (Harvey LAB-AA v1.1).
- Muse Spark: 1 new result (SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA).
- Muse Wonder Full (max): first results.
Related comparisons
- Muse Spark vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Muse Spark vs Gemini 4 Argon
- Muse Spark vs Claude Fable 5.1
- Muse Wonder Full vs Claude Opus 5.5
- Muse Wonder Full vs Gemini 4 Argon
- Muse Wonder Full vs Claude Fable 5.1
- Muse Wonder Full vs GPT-6 Astra
- Muse Spark vs Muse Spark 1.3
Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for coding · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs
Muse Spark vs Muse Wonder Full: questions
- Is Muse Spark better than Muse Wonder Full?
- Muse Spark and Muse Wonder Full (max) are neck and neck on quality (64.3 vs 70.7, within the ±9.2 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.
- Is Muse Spark better than Muse Wonder Full for coding?
- Muse Wonder Full scores higher in coding (72 vs 65 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is better for long documents?
- Muse Wonder Full scores higher on long-context benchmarks (67 vs 64). Muse Wonder Full accepts more context: 1,000,000 against 262,144 tokens for Muse Spark.
- Do independent benchmarks agree on Muse Spark vs Muse Wonder Full?
- Across the 10 benchmarks both have, Muse Spark leads 2, Muse Wonder Full leads 8. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Wonder Full ahead.
- When was Muse Wonder Full released?
- Muse Wonder Full was released on 12 Oct 2026.