Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.3
Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.4 to 50.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 30 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 30 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 4.6 scores higher in 2 categories and Muse Spark 1.3 in 8 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Muse Spark 1.3 leads 72.4 to 51.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is Chess Puzzles: 13% for Claude Sonnet 4.6 and 38% for Muse Spark 1.3.
- Muse Spark 1.3 is cheaper at $1.25 / $4.25 per million input/output tokens, against $3 / $15 for Claude Sonnet 4.6.
- Muse Spark 1.3 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 50.1 | 54.4 |
| Released | 2026-02-17 | 2026-09-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $3 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $15 | $4.25 |
| Results tracked | 57 | 34 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Spark 1.3 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 46.0 (#62), Muse Spark 1.3: 56.1 (#18)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1521 | 1655 |
| SciCode | 46.8% | 59.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1504 | 1516 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 75.2% | — |
| DeepSWE | 29.9% | — |
| FrontierCode | 24.3% | — |
| CursorBench | — | 41.6% |
| WeirdML | 66.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,327 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 39.1 (#26), Muse Spark 1.3: 38.6 (#28)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 43% | 57.8% |
| GDP.pdf | 18% | 27.6% |
| Terminal-Bench | 53.4% | — |
| OSWorld 2.0 | 9.3% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 54.9% | — |
| OSWorld | 72.1% | — |
| ExploitBench | 23.6% | — |
| GBAEval | 48.8% | — |
| LMArena Search | 1221 | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 7,204 | — |
Reasoning Muse Spark 1.3 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 46.1 (#40), Muse Spark 1.3: 52.9 (#27)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 80.9% | 85.1% |
| CritPt | 3.1% | 24.9% |
| Chess Puzzles | 13% | 38% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1485 | 1503 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 16% | 25% |
| DTBench | 89.9% | 96.5% |
| LMCA | 46.5% | 53.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 152.25 | 156.89 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 60.4% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 86.5% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 76.3% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | — | 0.14 |
| ForecastBench | 62 | — |
Math Muse Spark 1.3 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 51.9 (#41), Muse Spark 1.3: 72.4 (#16)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 85.8% | 99.2% |
| LMArena Math | 1463 | 1497 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | — | 74.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | — | 46.3% |
| ProofBench | 45% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 32.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 8.3% | — |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 4.6 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 51.6 (#60), Muse Spark 1.3: 42.0 (#92)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1500 | 1516 |
| GPQA Diamond | 87.4% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 35.5% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 10.6% | — |
Multimodal Muse Spark 1.3 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 38.0 (#61), Muse Spark 1.3: 43.0 (#21)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1283 | 1310 |
| LMArena Document | 1482 | 1471 |
| Blueprint-Bench 2 | 6.7% | — |
Multilingual Muse Spark 1.3 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 54.6 (#39), Muse Spark 1.3: 57.8 (#6)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1440 | 1485 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1491 | 1527 |
| LMArena French | 1465 | 1534 |
| LMArena Korean | 1411 | 1513 |
| LMArena Russian | 1440 | 1491 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1465 | 1485 |
| LMArena German | 1428 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1419 | — |
Instruction Following Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 77.6 (#23), Muse Spark 1.3: 77.8 (#14)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1476 | 1481 |
Long Context Too close to call
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 45.3 (#40), Muse Spark 1.3: 45.7 (#29)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1479 | 1491 |
Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.3 leads
Claude Sonnet 4.6: 70.4 (#22), Muse Spark 1.3: 73.7 (#10)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1458 | 1490 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1435 | 1450 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1810 | 1906 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1464 | 1486 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1207 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 better than Muse Spark 1.3?
Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.4 to 50.1 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Muse Spark 1.3?
Muse Spark 1.3 is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $4.25 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 4.6 lists at $3 and $15.
Is Claude Sonnet 4.6 or Muse Spark 1.3 better for coding?
Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 56.1 versus 46.0 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.3 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 4.6 and Muse Spark 1.3 share?
30 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 4.6 has 57 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.3 has 34.