Model comparison
Celeris-1 vs Muse Spark
Head-to-head evidence from 0 shared benchmark results across 0 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Public leaderboard positions: Celeris-1 unranked (Not scored); Muse Spark #13 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Celeris-1 and Muse Spark share 0 comparable benchmark results. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 1 result is unique to Celeris-1; 39 to Muse Spark.
Updated July 24, 2026- Shared results
- 0
- Celeris-1 only
- 1
- Muse Spark only
- 39
- Comparable categories
- 1 / 8
Treat this as a split decision. Celeris-1 makes more sense if knowledge is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model; Muse Spark is the better fit if you need the larger 262K context window or you want the stronger reasoning-first profile.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 0 shared benchmark results across 0 evidence categories; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Celeris-1 and Muse Spark finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.
Muse Spark is the reasoning model in the pair, while Celeris-1 is not. That usually helps on harder chain-of-thought-heavy tests, but it can also mean more latency and more token spend in real use. Muse Spark gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 8K for Celeris-1.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Celeris-1 | Muse Spark | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Celeris-1$2 input / $6 output | Muse SparkNot available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | Celeris-1Not available | Muse SparkNot available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | Celeris-1Not available | Muse SparkNot available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Celeris-18K | Muse Spark262K | Muse Spark lists the larger context window. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
Agentic8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | — | 59% | Not comparable |
| τ²-bench resultsSource | — | 91.5% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 74.8% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 43.5% | Not comparable |
| Claw-EvalSource | — | 63.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 28.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 32.2% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1144 | Not comparable |
Coding6 benchmarks
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeCeleris-1 wins12 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU-ProSource | 75.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | — | 89.5% | Not comparable |
| HLESource | — | 50.4% | Not comparable |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | — | 42.8% | Not comparable |
| HealthBench HardSource | — | 42.8% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (Text)Source | — | 52.6% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 43.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 88.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 39.9% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 4.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 44.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 73.2% | Not comparable |
Math2 benchmarks
Multimodal8 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| CharXivSource | — | 86.4% | Not comparable |
| MMMU-ProSource | — | 80.4% | Not comparable |
| ERQASource | — | 64.7% | Not comparable |
| SimpleVQASource | — | 71.3% | Not comparable |
| ScreenSpot ProSource | — | 84.1% | Not comparable |
| ZeroBenchSource | — | 33.0% | Not comparable |
| MedXpertQA (MM)Source | — | 78.4% | Not comparable |
| AA-MMMU-ProSource | — | 80.5% | Not comparable |
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Celeris-1 | Muse Spark | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA-IFBenchSource | — | 75.9% | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (2)
Which is better, Celeris-1 or Muse Spark?
Celeris-1 and Muse Spark are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Celeris-1 or Muse Spark?
Celeris-1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 75.9 versus 50.4. Muse Spark stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.
Related Comparisons
Explore More
Choose a model with this week’s evidence
Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.
One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.