Model comparison
GPT-5.4 nano vs Muse Spark 1.3
Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 nano costs 4.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.4 nano scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark 1.3 in 9 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where Muse Spark 1.3 leads 73.1 to 40.9.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 5% for GPT-5.4 nano and 58% for Muse Spark 1.3.
- GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper at $0.20 / $1.25 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.3.
- Muse Spark 1.3 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 400K.
Side by side
| GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 41.9 | 54.8 |
| Released | 2026-03-17 | 2026-09-02 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 400K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.20 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $1.25 | $4.25 |
| Results tracked | 40 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Spark 1.3 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 43.6 (#84), Muse Spark 1.3: 56.6 (#21)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 46.9% | 59.7% |
| LMArena Coding | 1405 | 1514 |
| CursorBench | — | 41.6% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1657 |
| WeirdML | 49.2% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,005 | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
GPT-5.4 nano: —, Muse Spark 1.3: 38.6 (#30)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 57.8% |
| GDP.pdf | — | 27.6% |
Reasoning Muse Spark 1.3 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 23.7 (#173), Muse Spark 1.3: 54.0 (#27)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 9.3% | 26% |
| Chess Puzzles | 30% | 38% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1381 | 1503 |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 9% | 25% |
| DTBench | 80.3% | 96.5% |
| LMCA | 36.9% | 53.9% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 145.81 | 156.75 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 5.7% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 39.7% | — |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 85.1% |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 51.5% | — |
| Bench to the Future 3 | — | 0.14 |
| ForecastBench | 57.3 | — |
Math Muse Spark 1.3 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 40.9 (#88), Muse Spark 1.3: 73.1 (#21)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 44.9% | 74.4% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 12.2% | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 87.8% | 99.2% |
| ProofBench | 5% | 58% |
| LMArena Math | 1406 | 1494 |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 25.9% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 6.3% | — |
Knowledge Too close to call
GPT-5.4 nano: 41.9 (#103), Muse Spark 1.3: 42.6 (#95)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1396 | 1516 |
| GPQA Diamond | 78.5% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | 11.7% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 3.1% | — |
Multimodal Muse Spark 1.3 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 36.7 (#78), Muse Spark 1.3: 43.7 (#22)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1196 | 1309 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1471 |
Multilingual Muse Spark 1.3 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 48.6 (#140), Muse Spark 1.3: 57.4 (#8)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1359 | 1481 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1392 | 1529 |
| LMArena French | 1396 | 1524 |
| LMArena German | 1367 | 1515 |
| LMArena Japanese | 1343 | 1474 |
| LMArena Korean | 1320 | 1501 |
| LMArena Russian | 1363 | 1490 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1371 | 1490 |
Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.3 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 71.9 (#144), Muse Spark 1.3: 77.5 (#22)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1362 | 1477 |
Long Context Muse Spark 1.3 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 41.6 (#137), Muse Spark 1.3: 45.6 (#32)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1366 | 1488 |
Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.3 leads
GPT-5.4 nano: 55.7 (#142), Muse Spark 1.3: 73.6 (#9)
| Benchmark | GPT-5.4 nano | Muse Spark 1.3 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1372 | 1490 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1314 | 1455 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1382 | 1482 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1906 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-5.4 nano better than Muse Spark 1.3?
Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 41.9 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5.4 nano costs 4.3× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-5.4 nano or Muse Spark 1.3?
GPT-5.4 nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.20 per million input tokens and $1.25 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.3 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.
Is GPT-5.4 nano or Muse Spark 1.3 better for coding?
Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 56.6 versus 43.6 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.3 does, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.
How many benchmarks do GPT-5.4 nano and Muse Spark 1.3 share?
29 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.4 nano has 40 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.3 has 37.