Noometry

Model comparison

Mercury 2.5 vs Muse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#43); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Mercury 2.5 Inception

30.2

Unranked Sparse

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #43 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Mercury 2.5 scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark 1.1 in 1 category; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 44.0 to 22.4.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 3% for Mercury 2.5 and 39% for Muse Spark 1.1.
  • Mercury 2.5 is cheaper at $0.04 / $0.15 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 260K.

Side by side

Mercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
ProviderInceptionMeta
Noometry Index30.249.9
Released2026-09-082026-04-08
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window260K1.05M
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.04$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.15$4.25
Results tracked236

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 50.8 (#38)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
DeepSWE—53.3%
LMArena WebDev—1542
SciCode—58.8%
LMArena Coding—1497
ALE-Bench301.65—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 33.9 (#45)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
τ²-bench Banking—40.5%
GBAEval—7.9%
GDP.pdf—15%
Vending-Bench 2—6,520

Reasoning Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 45.9 (#41)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
NYT Connections (extended)—84.9%
CritPt—15.1%
LMArena Hard Prompts—1486
DTBench—94.4%
LMCA—49.9%
Surface Evolver Bench—52.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index—154.32

Math Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Mercury 2.5: 22.4, Muse Spark 1.1: 44.0 (#67)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
ProofBench3%39%
LMArena Math—1477

Knowledge Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 52.8 (#55)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
SimpleQA Verified—57.8%
LMArena Expert—1480

Multimodal Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 41.9 (#28)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision—1292
LMArena Document—1465

Multilingual Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 56.8 (#16)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse 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

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 76.8 (#36)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Instruction Following—1457

Long Context Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#55)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse Spark 1.1
LMArena Longer Query—1463

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Mercury 2.5: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 73.6 (#11)

BenchmarkMercury 2.5Muse 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 Mercury 2.5 better than Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#43); Mercury 2.5 does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Mercury 2.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Mercury 2.5 is cheaper. It lists at $0.04 per million input tokens and $0.15 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.1 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 260K.

How many benchmarks do Mercury 2.5 and Muse Spark 1.1 share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Mercury 2.5 has 2 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.1 has 36.

Related comparisons

Go deeper