# GPT-5.2 vs Muse Spark 1.2

> GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 49.8 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.2 costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

- Canonical page: https://noometry.com/compare/gpt-5-2-vs-muse-spark-1-2
- Last updated: 2026-10-10
- Shared benchmarks: 22

## Summary

- They share 22 benchmarks with published results for both. GPT-5.2 scores higher in 5 categories and Muse Spark 1.2 in 5 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in math, where GPT-5.2 leads 59.8 to 43.8.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is SimpleBench: 45.8% for GPT-5.2 and 74.5% for Muse Spark 1.2.
- Muse Spark 1.2 is cheaper at $1.25 / $4.25 per million input/output tokens, against $1.75 / $14 for GPT-5.2.
- Muse Spark 1.2 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 400K.

## Snapshot

| | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | OpenAI | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 54.1 | 49.8 |
| Rank | 31 | 44 |
| Context | 400K | 1.05M |
| Input $/M | $1.75 | $1.25 |
| Output $/M | $14 | $4.25 |
| Weights | Proprietary | Proprietary |

## Coding

- GPT-5.2: 52.2 (#32)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 48.6 (#49)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena WebDev | 1415 | 1532 |
| WeirdML | 72.2% | 60.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1447 | 1497 |
| SWE-bench Verified | 73.8% | — |
| DeepSWE | — | 54.9% |
| SWE-bench Verified (bash only) | 72.8% | — |
| SWE-bench Multilingual | 66.7% | — |
| FrontierSWE | — | 12% |
| SciCode | — | 56.4% |
| GSO | 27.4% | — |
| ALE-Bench | 1,294 | — |
| AlgoTune | 2.05 | — |

## Agentic & Tool Use

- GPT-5.2: 40.0 (#24)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 29.5 (#77)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench | 64.9% | — |
| APEX-Agents | — | 36.4% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 55.9% | — |
| GDPval | 49.7% | — |
| Remote Labor Index | 2.5% | — |
| τ²-bench Airline | 83% | — |
| τ²-bench Banking | 32.2% | — |
| τ²-bench Retail | 81.6% | — |
| τ²-bench Telecom | 89.7% | — |
| DeepResearch Bench | 41.1% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 16% |
| LMArena Search | 1207 | — |
| METR Time Horizons | 75.3% | — |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 3,591 | — |

## Reasoning

- GPT-5.2: 50.1 (#33)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 50.4 (#32)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleBench | 45.8% | 74.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | 83.6% | 79.2% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1445 | 1490 |
| DTBench | 90.9% | 94.7% |
| LMCA | 43.9% | 48.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 153.45 | 155.18 |
| ARC-AGI-2 | 52.9% | — |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 73.3% | — |
| ARC-AGI-1 | 86.2% | — |
| CritPt | — | 17.7% |
| Chess Puzzles | 49% | — |
| EnigmaEval | 10.4% | — |
| EBR-Bench | 23% | — |
| Mystery Game Puzzles | 23% | — |
| ForecastBench | 60.1 | — |

## Math

- GPT-5.2: 59.8 (#32)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 43.8 (#68)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| ProofBench | 15% | 43% |
| FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3) | 67.4% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 | 31.7% | — |
| MathArena Final-Answer Competitions | 72% | — |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 96.1% | — |
| LMArena Math | 1439 | — |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | 40.7% | — |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | 18.8% | — |

## Knowledge

- GPT-5.2: 59.2 (#29)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 53.9 (#49)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| SimpleQA Verified | 37.1% | 60.3% |
| LMArena Expert | 1445 | 1485 |
| GPQA Diamond | 91.4% | — |
| Humanity's Last Exam | 27.8% | — |
| Vectara Hallucination Rate | 8.4% | — |

## Multimodal

- GPT-5.2: 50.9 (#7)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 42.6 (#24)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | 1268 | 1304 |
| VPCT | 84% | — |
| Furniture Assembly | 38.3% | — |
| LMArena Document | 1405 | — |

## Multilingual

- GPT-5.2: 53.6 (#63)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 57.4 (#10)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1425 | 1479 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1460 | 1519 |
| LMArena Russian | 1440 | 1494 |
| LMArena French | 1456 | — |
| LMArena German | 1448 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1421 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1390 | — |
| LMArena Spanish | 1433 | — |

## Instruction Following

- GPT-5.2: 74.9 (#83)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 77.1 (#30)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1417 | 1466 |

## Long Context

- GPT-5.2: 44.0 (#74)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 45.4 (#35)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1428 | 1483 |
| CL-bench | 18.2% | — |

## Writing & Preference

- GPT-5.2: 67.0 (#30)
- Muse Spark 1.2: 72.6 (#14)

| Benchmark | GPT-5.2 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1439 | 1486 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1402 | 1444 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 1703 | 1840 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1458 | 1504 |

## FAQ

### Is GPT-5.2 better than Muse Spark 1.2?

GPT-5.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.1 to 49.8 on the Noometry Index. Muse Spark 1.2 costs 2.4× less per token, which makes it the better buy when GPT-5.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

### Which is cheaper, GPT-5.2 or Muse Spark 1.2?

Muse Spark 1.2 is cheaper. It lists at $1.25 per million input tokens and $4.25 per million output tokens; GPT-5.2 lists at $1.75 and $14.

### Is GPT-5.2 or Muse Spark 1.2 better for coding?

GPT-5.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 52.2 versus 48.6 in the Noometry coding category.

### Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.2 does, with 1.05M tokens against 400K.

### How many benchmarks do GPT-5.2 and Muse Spark 1.2 share?

22 benchmarks have published results for both models. GPT-5.2 has 67 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.2 has 28.