Model comparison
GLM-5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.1
Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 47.8 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 28 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 28 benchmarks with published results for both. GLM-5.1 scores higher in 3 categories and Muse Spark 1.1 in 6 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in reasoning, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 47.1 to 39.1.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 34% for GLM-5.1 and 57.8% for Muse Spark 1.1.
- Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper at $1.25 / $4.25 per million input/output tokens, against $1.40 / $4.40 for GLM-5.1.
- Muse Spark 1.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 200K.
- GLM-5.1 has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Z.ai (Zhipu) | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 47.8 | 49.9 |
| Released | 2026-04-07 | 2026-04-08 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 200K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 131K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $1.40 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $4.40 | $4.25 |
| Results tracked | 41 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 48.7 (#55), Muse Spark 1.1: 51.3 (#40)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1508 | 1542 |
| SciCode | 43.8% | 58.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1485 | 1498 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 74.2% | — |
| DeepSWE | — | 53.3% |
| WeirdML | 57.1% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 887.1 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 24.9 (#113), Muse Spark 1.1: 30.8 (#73)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 40.9% | 31.8% |
| GBAEval | 0% | 7.9% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 5,634 | 6,520 |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 40.5% |
| ExploitBench | 18.1% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 15% |
Reasoning Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 39.1 (#60), Muse Spark 1.1: 47.1 (#44)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 77.7% | 84.9% |
| CritPt | 4.6% | 15.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1472 | 1486 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 149.84 | 154.21 |
| SimpleBench | 55.1% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 19% | — |
| Thematic Generalization | 69.8% | — |
| DTBench | — | 94.4% |
| LMCA | — | 49.9% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 52.5% |
Math GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 49.7 (#60), Muse Spark 1.1: 45.5 (#76)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 22.2% | 39% |
| LMArena Math | 1473 | 1483 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 36.8% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 67.1% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 93.3% | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 33.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 12.5% | — |
Knowledge GLM-5.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 54.9 (#50), Muse Spark 1.1: 53.1 (#59)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | 34% | 57.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1476 | 1478 |
| GPQA Diamond | 89.9% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
GLM-5.1: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 42.6 (#29)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1293 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1465 |
Multilingual Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 55.0 (#36), Muse Spark 1.1: 56.7 (#17)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1447 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1515 | 1518 |
| LMArena French | 1474 | 1494 |
| LMArena German | 1465 | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1434 | 1451 |
| LMArena Korean | 1418 | 1458 |
| LMArena Russian | 1454 | 1483 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1469 | 1464 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GLM-5.1: 76.3 (#42), Muse Spark 1.1: 76.5 (#39)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1451 | 1457 |
Long Context Too close to call
GLM-5.1: 44.9 (#53), Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#58)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1466 | 1462 |
Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GLM-5.1: 66.9 (#31), Muse Spark 1.1: 73.4 (#11)
| Benchmark | GLM-5.1 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1461 | 1479 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1453 | 1437 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1592 | 1927 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1472 | 1485 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1260 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GLM-5.1 better than Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 47.8 on the Noometry Index.
Which is cheaper, GLM-5.1 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; GLM-5.1 lists at $1.40 and $4.40.
Is GLM-5.1 or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?
Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 48.7 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 200K.
How many benchmarks do GLM-5.1 and Muse Spark 1.1 share?
28 benchmarks have published results for both models. GLM-5.1 has 41 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.1 has 37.