Meta Proprietary Released Apr 8, 2026 Updated
Muse Spark
ToolsGuide Scores, rankings, test results and price.
Model summary
Summary
Muse Spark is Meta's model, released Apr 8, 2026. It's ranked in 2 categories and does best at text: #39 of 416, with a ToolsGuide Score of 516 against a median of 235.
It also ranks #25 of 167 for vision (552).
It has published results on 19 tests and has the top score on 4 of them, including HealthBench Hard and MedXpertQA.
Specifications
- Creator
Meta
- Licence
- Proprietary
- Released
- Apr 8, 2026
- Context window
- –
- Input price
- –
- Output price
- –
- Tests reported
- 19
- Settings ranked
- Muse Spark
Model comparison
Against the ten best text models.
Text score
ToolsGuide Score out of 1,000 · Higher is better
Vision score
ToolsGuide Score out of 1,000 · Higher is better
Input price
USD per 1M input tokens · Lower is better
Leaderboards
Where Muse Spark sits among the top 20 in each category.
Text
#39 of 416 · ToolsGuide Score out of 1,000, where 1,000 is a flawless model
Vision
#25 of 167 · ToolsGuide Score out of 1,000, where 1,000 is a flawless model
By task
Scored from votes on each kind of prompt alone, on the same 1,000-point scale.
Against its nearest rivals
Text prompts by kind · ToolsGuide Score from votes · hover for values
-
Muse Spark
-
glm-5.3-max -
claude-sonnet-4-6
Text
Muse Spark · hover a bar for its rank
Vision
Muse Spark · hover a bar for its rank
Test results
Every test Muse Spark has a published result on, out of 100%, with its rank among the models that took it.
GPQA
#32 / 256Graduate-level science questions written to be hard to look up.
89.5%
Self-reported
SWE-Bench Verified
#29 / 120Fixing real bugs in real GitHub projects, checked by the projects' own tests.
77.4%
Self-reported
Humanity's Last Exam
#8 / 108Humanity's Last Exam (HLE) is a multi-modal academic benchmark with 2,500 questions across mathematics, humanities, and natural sciences, designed to test LLM capabilities at the frontier of human knowledge with unambiguous, verifiable solutions
58.4%
Self-reported · In the text score· In the vision score
MMMU-Pro
#14 / 73College-level questions that need both an image and text to answer.
80.4%
Self-reported · In the vision score
SWE-Bench Pro
#50 / 61Harder, longer software engineering tasks from real codebases.
52.4%
Self-reported · In the coding score
CharXiv-R
#14 / 60Reading and reasoning about charts from scientific papers.
86.4%
Self-reported
Terminal-Bench 2.0
#24 / 54Getting real work done in a command-line terminal.
59.0%
Self-reported
Tau2 Telecom
#16 / 36τ²-Bench telecom domain evaluates conversational agents in a dual-control environment modeled as a Dec-POMDP, where both agent and user use tools in shared telecommunications troubleshooting scenarios that test coordination and communication capabilities.
91.5%
Self-reported
ERQA
#12 / 29Embodied Reasoning Question Answering benchmark consisting of 400 multiple-choice visual questions across spatial reasoning, trajectory reasoning, action reasoning, state estimation, and multi-view reasoning for evaluating AI capabilities in physical world interactions
64.7%
Self-reported
ScreenSpot Pro
#6 / 27ScreenSpot-Pro is a novel GUI grounding benchmark designed to rigorously evaluate the grounding capabilities of multimodal large language models (MLLMs) in professional high-resolution computing environments. The benchmark comprises 1,581 instructions across 23 applications spanning 5 industries and 3 operating systems, featuring authentic high-resolution images from professional domains with expert annotations. Unlike previous benchmarks that focus on cropped screenshots in consumer applications, ScreenSpot-Pro addresses the complexity and diversity of real-world professional software scenarios, revealing significant performance gaps in current MLLM GUI perception capabilities.
84.1%
Self-reported
HealthBench Hard
#1 / 24A challenging variation of HealthBench that evaluates large language models' performance and safety in healthcare through 5,000 multi-turn conversations with particularly rigorous evaluation criteria validated by 262 physicians from 60 countries
42.8%
Self-reported
ARC-AGI v2
#10 / 19ARC-AGI-2 is an upgraded benchmark for measuring abstract reasoning and problem-solving abilities in AI systems through visual grid transformation tasks. It evaluates fluid intelligence via input-output grid pairs (1x1 to 30x30) using colored cells (0-9), requiring models to identify underlying transformation rules from demonstration examples and apply them to test cases. Designed to be easy for humans but challenging for AI, focusing on core cognitive abilities like spatial reasoning, pattern recognition, and compositional generalization.
42.5%
Self-reported · In the text score· In the vision score
SimpleVQA
#6 / 17SimpleVQA is a visual question answering benchmark focused on simple queries.
0.7%
Self-reported
ZEROBench
#7 / 15ZEROBench is a challenging vision benchmark designed to test models on zero-shot visual understanding tasks.
0.3%
Self-reported
MedXpertQA
#1 / 12A comprehensive benchmark to evaluate expert-level medical knowledge and advanced reasoning, featuring 4,460 questions spanning 17 specialties and 11 body systems. Includes both text-only and multimodal subsets with expert-level exam questions incorporating diverse medical images and rich clinical information.
78.4%
Self-reported
DeepSearchQA
#9 / 10DeepSearchQA is a benchmark for evaluating deep search and question-answering capabilities, testing models' ability to perform multi-hop reasoning and information retrieval across complex knowledge domains.
74.8%
Self-reported
FrontierScience Research
#1 / 5FrontierScience Research is a benchmark evaluating AI models on cutting-edge scientific research questions requiring deep domain expertise, multi-step reasoning, and synthesis of complex scientific concepts across disciplines.
38.3%
Self-reported
LiveCodeBench Pro
#5 / 5LiveCodeBench Pro is an advanced evaluation benchmark for large language models for code that uses Elo ratings to rank models based on their performance on coding tasks. It evaluates models on real-world coding problems from programming contests (LeetCode, AtCoder, CodeForces) and provides a relative ranking system where higher Elo scores indicate superior performance.
0.0%
Self-reported
IPhO 2025
#1 / 2International Physics Olympiad 2025 (theory) comprises all 3 theory problems from the official 2025 IPhO competition. Results are based on blinded human evaluation with guidelines based on the official competition scoring, validated by domain experts.
82.6%
Unverified