Model comparison
Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Spark 1.1
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.5 to 49.9 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.1 costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 5 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 5 benchmarks with published results for both. Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher in 6 categories and Muse Spark 1.1 in 0 categories; 6 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads 88.7 to 44.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 100% for Claude Sonnet 5.5 and 39% for Muse Spark 1.1.
- Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper at $1.25 / $4.25 per million input/output tokens, against $2 / $10 for Claude Sonnet 5.5.
- Muse Spark 1.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.
Side by side
| Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 60.5 | 49.9 |
| Released | 2026-09-28 | 2026-04-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $4.25 |
| Results tracked | 16 | 36 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 65.5 (#6), Muse Spark 1.1: 50.8 (#38)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1699 | 1542 |
| SciCode | 61% | 58.8% |
| DeepSWE | — | 53.3% |
| FrontierCode | 52.1% | — |
| CursorBench | 55.5% | — |
| FrontierSWE | 61.9% | — |
| LMArena Coding | — | 1497 |
| ALE-Bench | 1,819 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 44.9 (#14), Muse Spark 1.1: 33.9 (#45)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 75.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 40.5% |
| GBAEval | — | 7.9% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 15% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 6,520 |
Reasoning Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 52.4 (#29), Muse Spark 1.1: 45.9 (#41)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 31.4% | 15.1% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 84.9% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | — | 1486 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 65% | — |
| DTBench | — | 94.4% |
| LMCA | — | 49.9% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 52.5% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | — | 154.32 |
Math Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 88.7 (#4), Muse Spark 1.1: 44.0 (#67)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 100% | 39% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 88.8% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 80.5% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
| LMArena Math | — | 1477 |
Knowledge Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 66.0 (#11), Muse Spark 1.1: 52.8 (#55)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | 46.5% | 57.8% |
| GPQA Diamond | 95.6% | — |
| LMArena Expert | — | 1480 |
Multimodal Claude Sonnet 5.5 leads
Claude Sonnet 5.5: 53.2 (#5), Muse Spark 1.1: 41.9 (#28)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1292 |
| Furniture Assembly | 75% | — |
| LMArena Document | — | 1465 |
Multilingual Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 56.8 (#16)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | — | 1471 |
| LMArena Chinese | — | 1518 |
| LMArena French | — | 1494 |
| LMArena German | — | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1445 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1459 |
| LMArena Russian | — | 1482 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1471 |
Instruction Following Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 76.8 (#36)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | — | 1457 |
Long Context Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#55)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | — | 1463 |
Writing & Preference Not comparable
Claude Sonnet 5.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 73.6 (#11)
| Benchmark | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | — | 1479 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | — | 1440 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1927 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1260 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | — | 1484 |
Frequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 better than Muse Spark 1.1?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the stronger model overall, scoring 60.5 to 49.9 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.1 costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Claude Sonnet 5.5's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $4.25 per million output tokens; Claude Sonnet 5.5 lists at $2 and $10.
Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 65.5 versus 50.8 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.
How many benchmarks do Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Spark 1.1 share?
5 benchmarks have published results for both models. Claude Sonnet 5.5 has 16 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.1 has 36.