Model comparison

GPT-5 Nano vs Muse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5 Nano costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.

GPT-5 Nano OpenAI

33.5

Rank #241 Confirmed

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #51 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5 Nano scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark 1.1 in 10 categories; 10 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 73.4 to 39.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleQA Verified: 11.7% for GPT-5 Nano and 57.8% for Muse Spark 1.1.
  • GPT-5 Nano is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.40 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.1.
  • Muse Spark 1.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 400K.

Side by side

GPT-5 Nano and Muse Spark 1.1 specifications
GPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
ProviderOpenAIMeta
Noometry Index33.549.9
Released2025-08-072026-04-08
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window400K1.05M
Max output128K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.05$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.40$4.25
Results tracked4937

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 33.6 (#254), Muse Spark 1.1: 51.3 (#40)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Coding13511498
DeepSWE—53.3%
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)34.8%—
LMArena WebDev—1542
SciCode—58.8%
WeirdML38.1%—
ALE-Bench718.67—

Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 25.8 (#106), Muse Spark 1.1: 30.8 (#73)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
Terminal-Bench21.8%—
APEX-Agents—31.8%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard51.5%—
τ²-bench Banking—40.5%
GBAEval—7.9%
GDP.pdf—15%
Vending-Bench 2—6,520

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 16.3 (#306), Muse Spark 1.1: 47.1 (#44)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Hard Prompts13281486
DTBench62.7%94.4%
LMCA7.9%49.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index139.38154.21
ARC-AGI-22.6%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark62.2%—
NYT Connections (extended)—84.9%
ARC-AGI-120.7%—
CritPt—15.1%
Chess Puzzles27%—
Mystery Game Puzzles9%—
Surface Evolver Bench—52.5%
ForecastBench59.1—

Math Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 29.4 (#241), Muse Spark 1.1: 45.5 (#76)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
ProofBench12%39%
LMArena Math13171483
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)20%—
FrontierMath Tier 42.4%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202581.1%—
Omni-MATH54.6%—
MATH Level 595.2%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)8.3%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 35.9 (#178), Muse Spark 1.1: 53.1 (#59)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
SimpleQA Verified11.7%57.8%
LMArena Expert13211478
GPQA Diamond69.4%—
MMLU-Pro77.8%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate10.5%—
GPQA (HELM)67.9%—

Multimodal Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#108), Muse Spark 1.1: 42.6 (#29)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision11591293
VPCT37.2%—
LMArena Document—1465

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 45.3 (#172), Muse Spark 1.1: 56.7 (#17)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Non-English13131472
LMArena Chinese13561518
LMArena German13271466
LMArena Japanese12261451
LMArena Korean12691458
LMArena Russian12961483
LMArena Spanish13601464
LMArena French—1494

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 75.0 (#79), Muse Spark 1.1: 76.5 (#39)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Instruction Following13061457
IFEval93.2%—

Long Context Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 31.3 (#281), Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#58)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Longer Query13121462
Fiction.LiveBench44.4%—

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.1 leads

GPT-5 Nano: 39.1 (#249), Muse Spark 1.1: 73.4 (#11)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGPT-5 NanoMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text13201479
LMArena Creative Writing12491437
EQ-Bench Creative Writing7051927
LMArena Multi-Turn13111485
WildBench80.6%—
EQ-Bench 4—1260

Frequently asked questions

Is GPT-5 Nano better than Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 33.5 on the Noometry Index. GPT-5 Nano costs 15× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.1's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, GPT-5 Nano or Muse Spark 1.1?

GPT-5 Nano is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.1 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.

Is GPT-5 Nano or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 33.6 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

How many benchmarks do GPT-5 Nano and Muse Spark 1.1 share?

23 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5 Nano has 49 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.1 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper