Skip to main content
BenchLM

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Spark

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 27 shared benchmark results across 7 categories. Overall scores shown here use BenchLM's provisional ranking lane.

85/100
Margin
22.0pts
← winning
63/100
4 category wins1 category wins

Verified leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.8 #3; Muse Spark unranked

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Spark share 27 comparable benchmark results. 5 of 8 categories are comparable. 26 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.8; 14 to Muse Spark.

Updated July 12, 2026
Shared results
27
Claude Opus 4.8 only
26
Muse Spark only
14
Comparable categories
5 / 8

Pick Claude Opus 4.8 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Muse Spark only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 27 shared benchmark results across 7 evidence categories; 5 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Opus 4.8 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 85 to 63. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Claude Opus 4.8's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 80.3 against 59. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Pro, 69.2% to 52.4%. Muse Spark does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Claude Opus 4.8 gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Muse Spark.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Spark
CategoryClaude Opus 4.8ΔMuse Spark
AgenticClaude Opus 4.880.3Margin← 21.3Muse Spark59.0
MathClaude Opus 4.853.9Margin← 21.0Muse Spark32.9
CodingClaude Opus 4.876.4Margin← 14.7Muse Spark61.7
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.862.7Margin← 12.3Muse Spark50.4
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.877.0Margin→ 5.5Muse Spark82.5
ReasoningClaude Opus 4.8Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark42.5

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Opus 4.8B · Muse Spark

  1. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 69.2%B 52.4%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 16.8
    SWE-bench Pro: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 69.2%; Muse Spark scored 52.4%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  2. FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 31.250%B 14.600%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 16.7
    FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4): Claude Opus 4.8 scored 31.250%; Muse Spark scored 14.600%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  3. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 74.6%B 59%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 15.6
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 74.6%; Muse Spark scored 59%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  4. SWE-bench Verified

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 88.6%B 77.4%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 11.2
    SWE-bench Verified: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 88.6%; Muse Spark scored 77.4%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  5. FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Math
    Source ↗
    A 47.241%B 39.000%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 8.2
    FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3): Claude Opus 4.8 scored 47.241%; Muse Spark scored 39.000%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.8$5 input / $25 outputMuse SparkNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.8Not availableMuse SparkNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.8Not availableMuse SparkNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.81MMuse Spark262KClaude Opus 4.8 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%59%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
BrowseCompSource 84.3%—Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 93.1%74.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 83.4%—Not comparable
Finance Agent v2Source 53.9%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 16001145Claude Opus 4.8 leads
MCP AtlasSource 82.2%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource 59.9%—Not comparable
Gert LabsSource 72.97%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 47.2%28.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Tau2-TelecomSource 94.4%91.5%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
GDPval-AASource 55.0%32.3%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 21.1%—Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 20.6%—Not comparable
AA BriefcaseSource 1354—Not comparable
AA AutomationBenchSource 48.5%—Not comparable
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 44.0%—Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 7.5%—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 27.6%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource —43.5%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource —63.8%Not comparable
CodingClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 88.6%77.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
SWE-bench ProSource 69.2%52.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 84.4%—Not comparable
SWE MultimodalSource 38.4%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%—Not comparable
cursorBench31Source 58.4%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 62.3%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 74.3%58.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Terminal-Bench HardSource 58.3%45.5%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 53.5%51.5%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
FrontierCodeSource 46.5%—Not comparable
AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source 84.6%—Not comparable
LiveCodeBench ProSource —80.0%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource —19.67%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkResult
AA-LCRSource 67.7%69.7%Muse Spark leads
CritPtSource 20.9%11.3%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
ARC-AGI-2Source —42.5%Not comparable
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkResult
GPQASource 93.6%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 93.6%89.5%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HLESource 57.9%50.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 49.8%42.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 55.7%43.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.0%88.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-HLESource 45.7%39.9%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 27.4%4.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 46.6%44.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 35.9%73.2%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HealthBench HardSource —42.8%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source —52.6%Not comparable
MathClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkResult
USAMO 2026Source 96.7%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 47.241%39.000%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 31.250%14.600%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkResult
INCLUDESource 87.6%—Not comparable
MultimodalMuse Spark wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkResult
OfficeQA ProSource 66.2%—Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 87.9%84.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CharXivSource 89.9%86.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 80.5%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 1281—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource —80.4%Not comparable
ERQASource —64.7%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource —71.3%Not comparable
ZeroBenchSource —33.0%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source —78.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource —1444Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource —80.5%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse SparkResult
AA-IFBenchSource 62.2%75.9%Muse Spark leads
Frequently Asked Questions (6)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.8 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 85 to 63. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Pro, where the scores are 69.2% and 52.4%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.7 versus 50.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 76.4 versus 61.7. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 53.9 versus 32.9. Inside this category, FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4) is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.3 versus 59. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark?

Muse Spark has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.5 versus 77. Inside this category, ScreenSpot Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 12, 2026

The AI models change fast. We track them for you.

A weekly brief for engineers and researchers covering new models, ranking shifts, and pricing changes.

Free. No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.