Skip to main content
Radar

Five or fewer confirmed AI changes, with original sources, on mornings when something changed.A free source-linked morning brief.

Start free brief
BenchLM
Model A
Claude Haiku 4.5

Anthropic

57.1/100

Estimated · Public rank #87

90% interval 45.6–68.6

Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Muse Spark 1.1

Updated August 22, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Model B
Muse Spark 1.1

Meta

76.7/100

Supported · Public rank #7

90% interval 72.6–80.9

Decision reading

Muse Spark 1.1 has the higher public score, 76.74 versus 57.09, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.

1 results are shared. Category rows based on different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Which one for your work

Recommendations appear only when a shared evidence basis or an explicit operating constraint supports the call. Secondary and unsupported use cases stay disclosed below the initial list.

  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    Muse Spark 1.1

    Muse Spark 1.1 has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

    Tool use, computer use, and multi-step task completion

    Not enough matched evidence

    No shared weighted benchmark basis supports a winner.

    Confidence: limited

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Cache-heavy agent loop cost

    200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    The page does not recommend a cost winner because at least one model cannot fit the stated workload in one request. Claude Haiku 4.5 does not fit this workload in one request. Muse Spark 1.1 has no comparable published API token rate.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Not enough matched evidence

    A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.

    Confidence: listed-rates

What is actually comparable

Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.

Shared results
1
Claude Haiku 4.5 only
4
Muse Spark 1.1 only
20
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row states whether both averages use the same weighted benchmark set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner in this template.

Agentic

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not measured
Muse Spark 1.1
80.4
Weighted basis
0 vs 2 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
73.3
Muse Spark 1.1
61.5
Weighted basis
1 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not measured
Muse Spark 1.1
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not measured
Muse Spark 1.1
62.1
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
4.9
Muse Spark 1.1
Not measured
Weighted basis
2 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not measured
Muse Spark 1.1
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not measured
Muse Spark 1.1
88.4
Weighted basis
0 vs 1 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Claude Haiku 4.5
Not measured
Muse Spark 1.1
Not measured
Weighted basis
0 vs 0 rows
Reading
Not comparable

Shape of the matched evidence

Only shared public evidence is shown. Sparse evidence stays a ruled list rather than being closed into a radar shape.

A shared-evidence shape is not available.

BenchLM does not draw a radar or infer missing axes when the matched evidence is too sparse.

What each workload costs

Three fixed token mixes turn per-token rates into comparable decisions. Each scenario states context fit and whether cached input had to fall back to the published list-input rate.

Chat turn

1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

Claude Haiku 4.5
$0.0035
Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.1
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Muse Spark 1.1 has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Claude Haiku 4.5
$0.065
Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.1
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Muse Spark 1.1 has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens

Claude Haiku 4.5
$0.09
Does not fit in one request
Muse Spark 1.1
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Claude Haiku 4.5 does not fit this workload in one request. Muse Spark 1.1 has no comparable published API token rate.

Specification differences

Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.

Context window

Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.

Claude Haiku 4.5

200K

Claude API pricing

Muse Spark 1.1

1M

API model ID

Claude Haiku 4.5

claude-haiku-4-5-20251001

Claude API pricing

Muse Spark 1.1

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.

Claude Haiku 4.5

$0.1 per 1M cached input tokens

Claude API pricing

Muse Spark 1.1

No comparable hosted API rate

Documented inputs

Claude Haiku 4.5

Not sourced

Muse Spark 1.1

Not sourced

Documented outputs

Claude Haiku 4.5

Not sourced

Muse Spark 1.1

Not sourced

Provider availability

Claude Haiku 4.5

Not sourced

Muse Spark 1.1

Not sourced

Reasoning profile

Claude Haiku 4.5

Non-Reasoning

Muse Spark 1.1

Reasoning

Weight access

Claude Haiku 4.5

Proprietary

Muse Spark 1.1

Proprietary

License

Claude Haiku 4.5

Proprietary

Muse Spark 1.1

Proprietary

Release date

Claude Haiku 4.5

2025-10-15

Muse Spark 1.1

2026-07-09

If you already use one of these models
Deployment change
The models list different providers, so authentication, endpoint behavior, limits, and feature support may change.
Quality signal
Muse Spark 1.1 has the higher public score, 76.74 versus 57.09, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Muse Spark 1.1 has the larger documented window (1M).

Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Benchmark evidence

The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.

Browse raw public benchmark evidence25 rows

Agentic

  • JobBench

    Claude Haiku 4.516.0%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.154.7%
    Source

    Muse Spark 1.1 leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.180%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.188.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.175.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld-Verified

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.180.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • WebArena-Verified

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.169%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSearchQA

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.184.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CyberGym

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.159.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Finance Agent v2

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.157.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • deepSwe

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.153.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.114.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Cybench

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.192.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ExploitGym

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.10.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Claude Haiku 4.573.3%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.1—

    Not directly comparable

  • VulcanBench v3

    Claude Haiku 4.578.3%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.1—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.180.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.161.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • MRCR 1M

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.154.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • HLE

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.162.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.152.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HealthBench Professional

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.159.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Claude Haiku 4.55.903%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.1—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Claude Haiku 4.52.083%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.1—

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • CharXiv

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.188.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BabyVision

    Claude Haiku 4.5—
    Muse Spark 1.176.3%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the higher public score, 76.74 versus 57.09, and the 90% score intervals do not overlap. That is the clearest overall quality signal in the current public data.

Which is better for coding, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted coding basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a coding winner.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?

The published evidence does not provide a shared weighted agentic tasks basis for both models, so BenchLM does not name a agentic tasks winner.

Which costs less, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Both models do not have comparable published API token rates, so this page does not name a universal price winner.

Which has the larger context window, Claude Haiku 4.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 200K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated August 22, 2026

Watch Claude Haiku 4.5 vs Muse Spark 1.1

One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.