Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

GPT-5.4 Nano vs Muse Spark 1.2

Muse Spark 1.2 leads GPT-5.4 Nano on coding, 55.7 to 44.8 on the Vibe Coding Index, and GPT-5.4 Nano costs 3.4x less per output token ($1.25 vs $4.25 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 61 benchmarks have a result for both.

Replace GPT-5.4 Nano Replace Muse Spark 1.2
GPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI
Coding
44.8
Overall
45.7
Output $/M
$1.25
1
Muse Spark 1.2Meta
Coding
55.7
Overall
60.4
Output $/M
$4.25
60
vs boards won of 61 shared

GPT-5.4 Nano or Muse Spark 1.2: which to pick

Pick Muse Spark 1.2 for coding: it scores 55.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 44.8 for GPT-5.4 Nano.

Pick GPT-5.4 Nano for output tokens 3.4x cheaper ($1.25 vs $4.25 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.14 against $0.64).

Model AGPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI44.8/1002 independent benchmarks$0.14 per solved taskModel BMuse Spark 1.2Meta55.7/1005 independent benchmarks$0.64 per solved task
Shared results
61
GPT-5.4 Nano only
24
Muse Spark 1.2 only
36
Like-for-like categories
7 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-5.4 Nano 44.8 from 2 benchmarks, Muse Spark 1.2 55.7 from 5 benchmarks.
Widest category
Agentic work, 25.4 points apart on average over 5 shared benchmarks.
Widest single gap
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI): GPT-5.4 Nano 26.1% against Muse Spark 1.2 79.1%, 53.0 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
GPT-5.4 Nano $1.25 against Muse Spark 1.2 $4.25 per million output tokens, 3.4x apart.
Context window
GPT-5.4 Nano takes 400K tokens, Muse Spark 1.2 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-5.4 NanoBarsMuse Spark 1.2Ties
Coding09
Intelligence02
Agentic work05
Reasoning17
Math03
Knowledge011
General023
All shared boards160
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index09
Coding benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
LiveBench codingNot measured78.2%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
LMArena WebDevNot measured1534Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
AA Coding Index56.172.2Muse Spark 1.2
LiveCodeBench (Vals AI)84.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SWE-bench Verified (Vals AI)69.8%86.6%Muse Spark 1.2
Terminal-Bench 4 (Vals AI)Not measured6.1%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Vibe Code Bench (Vals AI)26.1%79.1%Muse Spark 1.2
Code migration (Vals AI)14.5%29.9%Muse Spark 1.2
ProgramBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.5%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
IOI (Vals AI)Not measured21.8%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals AI)41.6%69.7%Muse Spark 1.2
SkillsBench (Vals AI)Not measured53.0%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
CyberBench (Vals AI)Not measured69.5%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
SciCode47.2%57.4%Muse Spark 1.2
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)42.4%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierSWENot measured12.0%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
WeirdML49.2%60.3%Muse Spark 1.2
ALE-Bench1004.5Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: coding14041505Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: software and IT14021505Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena WebDev: ReactNot measured1526Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
LMArena WebDev: HTMLNot measured1543Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 21 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index02
Intelligence benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
AA Intelligence Index20.739.6Muse Spark 1.2
Epoch Capabilities Index146.0155.1Muse Spark 1.2
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index05
Agentic work benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
AA Agentic Index16.043.2Muse Spark 1.2
Design Arena: agents building web appsNot measured1221Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building full-stack appsNot measured1210Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building mobile appsNot measured1181Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building Android appsNot measured1222Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: agents building gamesNot measured1178Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: HTML slidesNot measured1074Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: PowerPoint slidesNot measured1170Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
LiveBench researchNot measured67.7%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
LiveBench browserNot measured36.0%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
LiveBench long agenticNot measured21.3%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
SREBench (Vals AI)Not measured0.0%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Finance Agent (Vals AI)38.2%60.6%Muse Spark 1.2
Tax Agent Bench (Vals AI)5.0%32.8%Muse Spark 1.2
Legal Research Bench (Vals AI)6.3%43.8%Muse Spark 1.2
Excel Modeling Benchmark (Vals AI)44.8%57.0%Muse Spark 1.2
BioMysteryBench (Vals AI)Not measured64.8%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
τ²-Bench Telecom76.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
APEX-AgentsNot measured45.4%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Neither model has a result on the other 23 boards here
ReasoningLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index17
Reasoning benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
GPQA Diamond77.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LiveBench reasoningNot measured90.0%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
MMMU Pro (Vals AI)73.6%86.1%Muse Spark 1.2
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)81.7%90.4%Muse Spark 1.2
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)28.3%45.5%Muse Spark 1.2
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)78.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ARC-AGI51.5%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ARC-AGI-25.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
SimpleBenchNot measured74.5%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Chess puzzles45.0%27.0%GPT-5.4 Nano
Mystery game puzzles9.0%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts13811489Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: expert13961475Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English13871487Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision: diagrams12101317Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision: homework1225Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Kagi LLM Benchmark39.7%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 6 boards here
MathLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index03
Math benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
AIME88.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
OTIS Mock AIME87.8%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tiers 1 to 344.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
FrontierMath, tier 412.2%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
ProofBench5.0%43.0%Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: math14051484Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: mathematical work14091480Muse Spark 1.2
Neither model has a result on the other 7 boards here
KnowledgeLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index011
Knowledge benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
MMLU Pro77.2%88.3%Muse Spark 1.2
LegalBench (Vals AI)77.9%85.3%Muse Spark 1.2
CaseLaw (Vals AI)51.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
CorpFin (Vals AI)61.2%70.9%Muse Spark 1.2
TaxEval (Vals AI)67.4%80.4%Muse Spark 1.2
MortgageTax (Vals AI)59.1%65.4%Muse Spark 1.2
MedCode (Vals AI)41.0%49.4%Muse Spark 1.2
SimpleQA Verified11.7%60.3%Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: science13741500Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare13691496Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: legal and government13681517Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: business and finance13661484Muse Spark 1.2
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index9 boards, none shared
Web design benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
Design Arena: websitesNot measured1312Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: UI componentsNot measured1299Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: game devNot measured1300Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: data vizNot measured1334Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: 3DNot measured1300Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: all code categoriesNot measured1312Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: SVGNot measured1283Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Design Arena: ASCII artNot measured1284Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
LiveBench designNot measured67.1%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
GeneralLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index023
General benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
LiveBench data analysisNot measured76.5%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
Public Benefits Bench (Vals AI)Not measured68.5%Only Muse Spark 1.2 measured
SAGE (Vals AI)38.1%47.7%Muse Spark 1.2
MedScribe (Vals AI)77.1%90.1%Muse Spark 1.2
Vals Multimodal Index47.6%69.8%Muse Spark 1.2
IFBench75.9%Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)76.7%79.0%Muse Spark 1.2
DTBench80.3%94.7%Muse Spark 1.2
LMCA36.9%48.4%Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text13721482Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: instruction following13621462Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: creative writing13151436Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision11961304Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: English13811483Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: non-English13591476Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: Chinese13911509Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: German1368Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Japanese1343Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: Korean13211462Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: French13951495Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: Spanish13711484Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: Russian13631483Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: Polish1366Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn13821502Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: longer queries13651473Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: writing and language13381453Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text: entertainment and media13251443Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision: English12021291Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision: Chinese1232Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: reading text12041313Muse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision: humor1161Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: recognizing things1141Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
LMArena Vision: creative writing1159Not measuredOnly GPT-5.4 Nano measured
Neither model has a result on the other 15 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for GPT-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
BenchmarkGPT-5.4 NanoMuse Spark 1.2Leader
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-5.4 Nano$0.0008Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.2$0.0034Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 Nano costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.014Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.2$0.075Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 Nano costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

GPT-5.4 Nano$0.052Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.2$0.292Fits in one request

GPT-5.4 Nano 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-5.4 Nano and Muse Spark 1.2
SpecificationOpenAI GPT-5.4 NanoMeta Muse Spark 1.2
MakerOpenAIMeta
WeightsNo public weights listedNo public weights listed
ReleasedMarch 17, 2026August 5, 2026
Context window400K1.05M
Input $/Mtok$0.20$1.25
Output $/Mtok$1.25$4.25
Coding index44.855.7
Independent measurements behind it25
Cost per solved task$0.14$0.64
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is GPT-5.4 Nano better than Muse Spark 1.2 for coding?

Pick Muse Spark 1.2 for coding: it scores 55.7 on the Vibe Coding Index against 44.8 for GPT-5.4 Nano. Pick GPT-5.4 Nano for output tokens 3.4x cheaper ($1.25 vs $4.25 per million) and a lower cost per solved task ($0.14 against $0.64).

Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 Nano or Muse Spark 1.2?

GPT-5.4 Nano costs $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.2 costs $1.25 and $4.25. Per solved SWE-bench Verified task, GPT-5.4 Nano costs $0.14 and Muse Spark 1.2 $0.64.

Which has the bigger context window, GPT-5.4 Nano or Muse Spark 1.2?

Muse Spark 1.2, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks is the GPT-5.4 Nano vs Muse Spark 1.2 comparison based on?

61 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. GPT-5.4 Nano's coding index rests on 2 independent benchmarks and Muse Spark 1.2's on 5. 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-5-4-nano-vs-meta-muse-spark-1-2" title="GPT-5.4 Nano vs Muse Spark 1.2, 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-5-4-nano-vs-meta-muse-spark-1-2">LLMBenchmark.ai, GPT-5.4 Nano vs Muse Spark 1.2</a></p>