Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.2 vs Muse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 leads GPT-5.2 on coding, 70.3 to 55.9 on the Vibe Coding Index, and Muse Spark 1.1 costs 3.3x less per output token ($4.25 vs $14.00 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 75 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-5.2 Replace Muse Spark 1.1
GPT-5.2OpenAI
Coding
55.9
Overall
60.7
Output $/M
$14.00
8
Muse Spark 1.1Meta
Coding
70.3
Overall
67.0
Output $/M
$4.25
67
vs boards won of 75 shared

GPT-5.2 or Muse Spark 1.1: which to pick

Pick Muse Spark 1.1 for coding: it scores 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index against 55.9 for GPT-5.2.

Pick GPT-5.2 for work measured by Design Arena: agents building Godot games or GPQA Diamond, where it leads.

Model AGPT-5.2OpenAI55.9/1003 independent benchmarks$1.91 per solved taskModel BMuse Spark 1.1Meta70.3/1003 independent benchmarks$0.43 per solved task
Shared results
75
GPT-5.2 only
39
Muse Spark 1.1 only
21
Like-for-like categories
8 of 9

Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.

Which one for your work

Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.

At a glance

Coding index
GPT-5.2 55.9 from 3 benchmarks, Muse Spark 1.1 70.3 from 3 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 13.8 points apart on average over 6 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
ProofBench: GPT-5.2 15.0% against Muse Spark 1.1 39.0%, 24.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.2 $14.00 against Muse Spark 1.1 $4.25 per million output tokens, 3.3x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.2 takes 400K tokens, Muse Spark 1.1 1.05M.

Benchmark by benchmark

First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGPT-5.2BarsMuse Spark 1.1Ties
Coding07
Intelligence02
Agentic work15
Reasoning46
Math03
Knowledge19
Web design08
General227
All shared boards867
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index07
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
SWE-bench Verified72.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SWE-bench Multilingual66.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena WebDev14171542Muse Spark 1.1
AA Coding IndexNot measured71.3Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)85.4%85.9%Muse Spark 1.1
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)75.8%82.0%Muse Spark 1.1
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)53.5%72.2%Muse Spark 1.1
Code migration (Vals AI)Not measured31.1%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)Not measured69.3%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured59.2%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)89.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SciCodeNot measured58.8%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)47.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Terminal-Bench64.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
GSO-Bench27.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
WeirdML72.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
ALE-Bench1293.5Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: coding14421498Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: software and IT14341498Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1532Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTML14271540Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena WebDev: from an imageNot measured1540Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
AA Intelligence Index30.433.7Muse Spark 1.1
Epoch Capabilities Index153.7154.1Muse Spark 1.1
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index15
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
AA Agentic IndexNot measured25.8Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Design Arena: agents building web apps10861207Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: agents building full-stack apps10431199Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: agents building mobile apps10931175Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: agents building Android apps10591178Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: agents building Godot games11421103GPT-5.2
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1183Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1195Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1155Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Design Arena: spreadsheetsNot measured1042Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)Not measured57.2%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)Not measured38.0%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)Not measured56.4%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Time Horizon Index (Vals AI)Not measured1.7%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom84.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured31.8%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
METR time horizons75.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Remote Labor Index2.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
GDPval49.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
DeepResearch Bench41.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Vending-Bench 2$3,591$6,520Muse Spark 1.1
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)55.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 19 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index46
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
GPQA Diamond91.7%91.2%GPT-5.2
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)86.7%86.6%GPT-5.2
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)90.3%89.8%GPT-5.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)37.7%46.2%Muse Spark 1.1
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)91.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
ARC-AGI86.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
ARC-AGI-252.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleBench45.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Chess puzzles48.0%34.0%GPT-5.2
Mystery game puzzles23.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
EBR-bench23.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
VPCT84.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts14281485Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: expert14451478Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English14311480Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision: diagrams12651305Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision: homework12761287Muse Spark 1.1
Kagi LLM Benchmark73.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 4 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
AIME96.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MGSM (Vals AI)94.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
AA Math Index99.0Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)99.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
OTIS Mock AIME96.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 367.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
FrontierMath, tier 431.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
ProofBench15.0%39.0%Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: math14401482Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: mathematical work14421487Muse Spark 1.1
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index19
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
MMLU Pro86.2%88.7%Muse Spark 1.1
LegalBench (Vals AI)82.8%85.0%Muse Spark 1.1
CaseLaw (Vals AI)66.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)65.9%71.3%Muse Spark 1.1
TaxEval (Vals AI)75.8%79.7%Muse Spark 1.1
MortgageTax (Vals AI)67.1%66.1%GPT-5.2
MedQA (Vals AI)94.1%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MedCode (Vals AI)49.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)87.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
SimpleQA Verified37.1%57.8%Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: science14251484Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare14251479Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: legal and government14271481Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: business and finance14141470Muse Spark 1.1
FACTS Benchmark Suite48.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 3 boards here
Web designLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index08
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
Design Arena: websites11951270Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: UI components11901289Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: game dev11951269Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: data viz12021268Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: 3D10791260Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: all code categories11701276Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: SVG11391235Muse Spark 1.1
Design Arena: ASCII art11521271Muse Spark 1.1
Neither model has a result on the other 1 board here
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index227
General benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured61.3%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)49.3%45.6%GPT-5.2
MedScribe (Vals AI)84.4%88.9%Muse Spark 1.1
Vals Multimodal IndexNot measured66.7%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
IFBench75.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)82.7%77.7%GPT-5.2
DTBench90.9%94.4%Muse Spark 1.1
LMCA43.9%49.9%Muse Spark 1.1
CL-bench18.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
Surface Evolver BenchNot measured52.5%Only Muse Spark 1.1 measured
Furniture assembly38.3%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Text14161478Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: instruction following14091457Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: creative writing13761435Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision12461293Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: English14221478Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: non-English14051471Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: Chinese14471515Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: German14441469Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: Japanese14201450Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: Korean13741459Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: French14541492Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: Spanish14131464Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: Russian14151482Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: Polish14261499Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: multi-turn14191484Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: longer queries14131462Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: writing and language13921448Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13781438Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision: English12431292Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision: Chinese13051348Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision: reading text12571301Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision: humor12271288Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision: captioning1267Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5.2 measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing12251253Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Document14051465Muse Spark 1.1
Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
BenchmarkGPT-5.2Muse Spark 1.1Leader
Neither model has a result on 5 boards here

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.

Chat turn

1K input + 500 output tokens

GPT-5.2$0.0088Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.1$0.0034Fits in one request

Muse Spark 1.1 costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.2$0.130Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.1$0.075Fits in one request

Muse Spark 1.1 costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.2$0.490Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.1$0.292Fits in one request

Muse Spark 1.1 costs less

Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.

Specification differences

The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.

Specifications of GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.1
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.2Meta Muse Spark 1.1
MakerOpenAIMeta
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedDecember 10, 2025July 16, 2026
Context window400K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$1.75$1.25
Output $/Mtok$14.00$4.25
Coding index55.970.3
Independent measurements behind it33
Cost per solved task$1.91$0.43
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.2 better than Muse Spark 1.1 for coding?

Pick Muse Spark 1.1 for coding: it scores 70.3 on the Vibe Coding Index against 55.9 for GPT-5.2. Pick GPT-5.2 for work measured by Design Arena: agents building Godot games or GPQA Diamond, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 or Muse Spark 1.1?

GPT-5.2 costs $1.75 per million input tokens and $14.00 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.1 costs $1.25 and $4.25. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.2 costs $1.91 and Muse Spark 1.1 $0.43.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.2 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.2 vs Muse Spark 1.1 comparison based on?

75 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.2's coding index rests on 3 independent benchmarks and Muse Spark 1.1's on 3. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.

Compare next

Embed this comparison on your site

Free under CC BY 4.0, while the source link stays visible. Preview the frame · Terms and other embeds

<iframe src="https://llmbenchmark.ai/embed/compare/gpt-5-2-vs-meta-muse-spark-1-1" title="GPT-5.2 vs Muse Spark 1.1, LLMBenchmark.ai" width="100%" height="360" style="border:0;max-width:100%" loading="lazy"></iframe>
<p style="font:13px/1.4 sans-serif;margin:6px 0 0">Source: <a href="https://llmbenchmark.ai/compare/gpt-5-2-vs-meta-muse-spark-1-1">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.2 vs Muse Spark 1.1</a></p>