Skip to main content
Radar

Keep up with the models you depend on. Follow price changes, retirements, and API updates.Follow the models you depend on.

Follow model changes
BenchLM
Cursor logo
Model A
Composer 2

Cursor

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Composer 2 vs Muse Spark 1.3

Updated September 4, 2026. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty. They are not guarantees for a specific workload.

Meta logo
Model B
Muse Spark 1.3

Meta

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Decision reading

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. Use the documented cost, context, and runtime rows instead.

0 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Share or export

Share on XLinkedInSocial cardCSVJSON

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 1.3

    Muse Spark 1.3 has the larger documented context window.

    Confidence: documented

  • Chat turn cost

    1K fresh input + 500 output tokens

    Composer 2

    Composer 2 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates

Show secondary and unsupported calls

  • Repository review cost

    50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

    Composer 2

    Composer 2 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.

    Confidence: listed-rates

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Not enough matched evidence

    Muse Spark 1.3 is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

    Confidence: limited

  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    Muse Spark 1.3 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic, so no winner is named for agentic.

    Confidence: limited

  • 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. Composer 2 does not fit this workload in one request. Composer 2 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

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
0
Composer 2 only
5
Muse Spark 1.3 only
10
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign lane for agentic, coding, and knowledge, and the weighted public rows elsewhere, with the same rank each model page reports. A row is like-for-like only when both scores rest on Supported evidence or the same weighted set. Directional and not-comparable rows remain visible, but they never receive a winner.

Agentic

Not comparable
Composer 2
51.3
Estimated · #55/151
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 1 vs 5 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
Composer 2
51.3
Estimated · #65/183
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 4 vs 3 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
Composer 2
Not ranked
Muse Spark 1.3
77.8
#8/22
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
Composer 2
Not ranked
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign lane · 0 vs 0 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Composer 2
Not ranked
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Composer 2
Not ranked
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Composer 2
Not ranked
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Composer 2
Not ranked
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.

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

Composer 2
$0.00175
Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.3
$0.00338
Fits in one request

Composer 2 has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Composer 2
$0.0325
Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.3
$0.07525
Fits in one request

Composer 2 has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

Composer 2
$0.135
Does not fit in one request
Cached input priced at the published list-input rate
Muse Spark 1.3
$0.0975
Fits in one request

Composer 2 does not fit this workload in one request. Composer 2 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Specification differences

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

Cached-input rate

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

Composer 2

Not published

Muse Spark 1.3

$0.15 per 1M cached input tokens

Meta: Muse Spark 1.3 model page

Reasoning profile

Composer 2

Reasoning

Muse Spark 1.3

Reasoning

Weight access

Composer 2

Proprietary

Muse Spark 1.3

Proprietary

License

Composer 2

Proprietary

Muse Spark 1.3

Proprietary

Release date

Composer 2

2026-03-19

Muse Spark 1.3

2026-09-02

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
The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict.
Workload cost
Repository review: $0.0325 vs $0.07525. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.135 vs $0.0975.
Context tradeoff
Muse Spark 1.3 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 evidence15 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Composer 261.7%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.388.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • JobBench

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.364.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.366.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSearchQA

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.389.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AutomationBench

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.349.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE Multilingual

    Composer 273.7%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-Rebench

    Composer 258%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • React Native Evals

    Composer 296.1%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Composer 261.7%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.388.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • deepSwe

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.375.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-Atlas Codebase QnA

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.359.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • MRCR v2 256K-512K

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.398.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MRCR v2 512K-1M

    Composer 2—
    Muse Spark 1.398.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Frequently asked questions

Which is better, Composer 2 or Muse Spark 1.3?

The public evidence has no benchmark result shared by both models, so it does not support a quality verdict. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Composer 2 or Muse Spark 1.3?

Muse Spark 1.3 is not ranked on the public lane for coding, so no winner is named for coding.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Composer 2 or Muse Spark 1.3?

Muse Spark 1.3 is not ranked on the public lane for agentic tasks, so no winner is named for agentic tasks.

Which costs less, Composer 2 or Muse Spark 1.3?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.00175 on Composer 2 and $0.00337 on Muse Spark 1.3; repository review costs $0.0325 and $0.07525; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.135 and $0.0975. Composer 2 does not fit this workload in one request. Composer 2 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Which has the larger context window, Composer 2 or Muse Spark 1.3?

Muse Spark 1.3 has the larger documented context window: 1M, compared with 200K.

Related comparisons

Compare API pricing Read the methodology Open the model selector

Last updated September 4, 2026

Watch Composer 2 vs Muse Spark 1.3

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

Read a sample issue

Join 2,000+ readers.