Model comparison
GPT-6.1 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.1
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 49.9 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.1 costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 23 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 23 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher in 8 categories and Muse Spark 1.1 in 2 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-6.1 Sol leads 93.7 to 45.5.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 99% for GPT-6.1 Sol 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 GPT-6.1 Sol.
- GPT-6.1 Sol accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1.05M.
Side by side
| GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 65.6 | 49.9 |
| Released | 2026-09-29 | 2026-04-08 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Context window | 1.05M | 1.05M |
| Max output | 128K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $2 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $10 | $4.25 |
| Results tracked | 34 | 37 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.2 (#8), Muse Spark 1.1: 51.3 (#40)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| DeepSWE | 75.2% | 53.3% |
| LMArena WebDev | 1755 | 1542 |
| SciCode | 55.8% | 58.8% |
| LMArena Coding | 1487 | 1498 |
| FrontierCode | 50.2% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 39.6 (#26), Muse Spark 1.1: 30.8 (#73)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | 60% | 31.8% |
| GDP.pdf | 32% | 15% |
| τ²-bench Banking | — | 40.5% |
| GBAEval | — | 7.9% |
| Vending-Bench 2 | — | 6,520 |
Reasoning GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 81.9 (#2), Muse Spark 1.1: 47.1 (#44)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| NYT Connections (extended) | 95.5% | 84.9% |
| CritPt | 31.7% | 15.1% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1466 | 1486 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 166.09 | 154.21 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 94.2% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 98.5% | — |
| Chess Puzzles | 61% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 54.3% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 80% | — |
| DTBench | — | 94.4% |
| LMCA | — | 49.9% |
| Surface Evolver Bench | — | 52.5% |
Math GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 93.7 (#1), Muse Spark 1.1: 45.5 (#76)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 99% | 39% |
| LMArena Math | 1464 | 1483 |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 93.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 100% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 100% | — |
Knowledge GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 71.8 (#4), Muse Spark 1.1: 53.1 (#59)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | 73.9% | 57.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1502 | 1478 |
| GPQA Diamond | 95.4% | — |
Multimodal GPT-6.1 Sol leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 52.7 (#5), Muse Spark 1.1: 42.6 (#29)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1288 | 1293 |
| Furniture Assembly | 80% | — |
| LMArena Document | — | 1465 |
Multilingual Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 54.3 (#46), Muse Spark 1.1: 56.7 (#17)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1438 | 1472 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1477 | 1518 |
| LMArena Russian | 1455 | 1483 |
| LMArena French | — | 1494 |
| LMArena German | — | 1466 |
| LMArena Japanese | — | 1451 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1458 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1464 |
Instruction Following Too close to call
GPT-6.1 Sol: 77.0 (#29), Muse Spark 1.1: 76.5 (#39)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1468 | 1457 |
Long Context Too close to call
GPT-6.1 Sol: 44.9 (#54), Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#58)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1465 | 1462 |
Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GPT-6.1 Sol: 63.6 (#63), Muse Spark 1.1: 73.4 (#11)
| Benchmark | GPT-6.1 Sol | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1447 | 1479 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1432 | 1437 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1449 | 1485 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | — | 1927 |
| EQ-Bench 4 | — | 1260 |
Frequently asked questions
Is GPT-6.1 Sol better than Muse Spark 1.1?
GPT-6.1 Sol is the stronger model overall, scoring 65.6 to 49.9 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.1 costs 2.0× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-6.1 Sol's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, GPT-6.1 Sol 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; GPT-6.1 Sol lists at $2 and $10.
Is GPT-6.1 Sol or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?
GPT-6.1 Sol scores higher on coding benchmarks: 63.2 versus 51.3 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
GPT-6.1 Sol does, with 1.05M tokens against 1.05M.
How many benchmarks do GPT-6.1 Sol and Muse Spark 1.1 share?
23 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-6.1 Sol has 34 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.1 has 37.