Muse Wonder Full vs Muse Spark Open
Too close to call on our weighted score (Muse Wonder Full 72, Muse Spark Open 72). The right pick depends on what you value most.
MetaMuse Wonder Full
72/100- ECI—
- Price—
- Context1.05M
- Meta
Muse Spark Open
72/100- ECI155.1
- Price$1.25 / $4.25
- Context1.05M
Add a model
Make it a three-way comparison.
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Muse Wonder Full 72/100, Muse Spark Open 72/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Muse Spark Open on price. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
- CapabilityNot enough dataNo independent benchmark covers every model here yet
- Lowest priceMuse Spark OpenMuse Spark Open $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend) · Muse Wonder Full unpriced
- Longest contextAbout the sameMuse Wonder Full 1,048,576 · Muse Spark Open 1,048,576 tokens
- Widest inputsSame inputsMuse Wonder Full: Text, Images, Audio, Video · Muse Spark Open: Text, Images, Audio, Video
- Self-hostingMuse Spark OpenPublishes downloadable weights (Muse Model License)
| Measure | Weight | Muse Wonder Full | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|---|
| Inputs & features | 60% | 80 | 80 |
| Context window | 40% | 61 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 72/100 | 72/100 |
Left out because at least one model lacks the data: capability and price. The remaining weights were rescaled.
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Muse Wonder FullMeta | Muse Spark OpenMeta |
|---|---|---|
| Capability | ||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | — | 155.1 |
| ECI rank | — | #39 of 165 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | 88.6% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | 69.8% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | 98.1% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 56.6% |
| Price per million tokens | ||
| Input | — | $1.25 |
| Output | — | $4.25 |
| Cached input | — | — |
| Blended (3:1) | — | $2.00 |
| Long-context rate | — | Same rate |
| Price source | — | Median of 16 providers |
| Limits | ||
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Max output | — | 131,072 tokens |
| Inputs and features | ||
| Text | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | No |
| Audio | Yes | Yes |
| Video | Yes | Yes |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yes |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | No |
| Availability | ||
| Weights | Proprietary | OpenMuse Model License |
| API model ID | — | — |
| API providers | — | 16 |
| Released | Oct 12, 2026 | Oct 15, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | Jan 4, 2026 |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Muse Wonder Full—
- Muse Spark Open$21.00
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Muse Wonder Full or Muse Spark Open?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Muse Wonder Full 72/100, Muse Spark Open 72/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Muse Spark Open on price. The score weighs inputs & features 60%, context window 40%. None of the shared benchmarks cover every model here yet, so capability is left out of this verdict.
Which is cheaper, Muse Wonder Full or Muse Spark Open?
Muse Spark Open is cheaper at $1.25 input / $4.25 output per million tokens (median across 16 API providers). . At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $2.00 per million tokens for Muse Spark Open versus . Muse Wonder Full has no published per-token price.
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
There is no independent benchmark that covers both models yet. Muse Wonder Full has not been scored yet and Muse Spark Open has an ECI of 155.1.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Muse Wonder Full and Muse Spark Open yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. Test both on a sample of your own tasks. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Wonder Full and Muse Spark Open share the same 1,048,576-token context window. Maximum output per response: Muse Spark Open up to 131,072 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Muse Wonder Full accepts text, images, audio and video; Muse Spark Open accepts text, images, audio and video. They handle the same number of input types.
Are any of these open source?
Muse Spark Open publishes its weights (Muse Model License) and can be self-hosted; Muse Wonder Full is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Muse Spark Open is the newest, released Oct 15, 2026. Muse Wonder Full came out Oct 12, 2026. Knowledge cutoff: Muse Spark Open Jan 4, 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 Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Add Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12BThree-way comparison
- Muse Wonder Full vs Nemotron 3.5 Super 120B A12BNVIDIA
- Muse Wonder Full vs Mercury 3Inception
- Muse Wonder Full vs LightOnOCR-3 0.8BLightOn
- Muse Wonder Full vs MiniCPM-V 4.7 35B-A3BOpenBMB
- Muse Spark Open vs GLM-5.3Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 156.2
- Muse Spark Open vs Grok 4.7xAI · ECI 154.6
