ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Muse Spark 1.3 vs Claude Fable 5.1

Muse Spark 1.3 comes out ahead, 73 to 66 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Our pick

    Meta

    Muse Spark 1.3

    Released Sep 2, 2026

    73/100
    • ECI156.9
    • Price$1.25 / $4.25
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Muse Spark 1.3

  2. Anthropic

    Claude Fable 5.1

    Released Sep 1, 2026

    66/100
    • ECI164.8
    • Price$10.00 / $50.00
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Claude Fable 5.1

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Muse Spark 1.3 is our pick

Muse Spark 1.3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Claude Fable 5.1 (66). It leads on price and inputs & features. Claude Fable 5.1 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityClaude Fable 5.1Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Fable 5.1 164.8 · Muse Spark 1.3 156.9
  • Lowest priceMuse Spark 1.3Muse Spark 1.3 $2.00 · Claude Fable 5.1 $20.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextMuse Spark 1.3Muse Spark 1.3 1,048,576 · Claude Fable 5.1 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsMuse Spark 1.3Muse Spark 1.3: Text, Images, PDFs, Audio, Video · Claude Fable 5.1: Text, Images, PDFs
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightMuse Spark 1.3Claude Fable 5.1
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8797
Price25%360
Inputs & features15%10080
Context window10%6160
Overall100%73/10066/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Muse Spark 1.3 vs Claude Fable 5.1 specifications side by side
SpecificationMuse Spark 1.3MetaClaude Fable 5.1Anthropic
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)156.9164.8 (best)
ECI rank#17 of 148#4 of 148 (best)
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics74.4%90.2% (best)
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics99.2%100% (best)
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions—70.8%
Price per million tokens
Input$1.25 (best)$10.00
Output$4.25 (best)$50.00
Cached input$0.15 (best)$0.25
Blended (3:1)$2.00 (best)$20.00
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceOfficial Meta APIOfficial Anthropic API
Limits
Context window1,048,576 tokens (best)1,000,000 tokens
Max output131,072 tokens (best)128,000 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesYes
AudioYesNo
VideoYesNo
ReasoningYesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh · maxYeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputYesYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model IDmuse-spark-1.3claude-fable-5-1
API providers1229 (best)
ReleasedSep 2, 2026Sep 1, 2026
Knowledge cutoff—Jun 2026
03 — Cost

What would a month cost?

Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.

  • Muse Spark 1.3$21.00
  • Claude Fable 5.1$200.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Muse Spark 1.3 or Claude Fable 5.1?

Muse Spark 1.3 is the better all-round choice, scoring 73/100 against Claude Fable 5.1 (66). It leads on price and inputs & features. Claude Fable 5.1 wins on capability. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.3 or Claude Fable 5.1?

Muse Spark 1.3 is cheaper at $1.25 input / $4.25 output per million tokens (official Meta API price). Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00 input / $50.00 output per million tokens (official Anthropic API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $2.00 per million tokens for Muse Spark 1.3 versus $20.00 for Claude Fable 5.1 (10× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Claude Fable 5.1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Claude Fable 5.1 164.8 (#4 of 148) and Muse Spark 1.3 156.9 (#17 of 148). Their confidence ranges do not overlap (161.8–169.1 vs 154.7–159.6), so the gap is a real one. On individual benchmarks: FrontierMath Tiers 1–3 — Claude Fable 5.1 90.2%, Muse Spark 1.3 74.4%; OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025 — Claude Fable 5.1 100%, Muse Spark 1.3 99.2%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Muse Spark 1.3 and Claude Fable 5.1 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Claude Fable 5.1 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.3 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Claude Fable 5.1. Maximum output per response: Muse Spark 1.3 up to 131,072, Claude Fable 5.1 up to 128,000 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Muse Spark 1.3 accepts text, images, PDFs, audio and video; Claude Fable 5.1 accepts text, images and PDFs. Muse Spark 1.3 handles the widest range of inputs.

Are any of these open source?

No. Muse Spark 1.3 and Claude Fable 5.1 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Muse Spark 1.3 is the newest, released Sep 2, 2026. Claude Fable 5.1 came out Sep 1, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Claude Fable 5.1 Jun 2026.

How do you decide the winner?

Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons