Chat turn cost
1K fresh input + 500 output tokens
Muse Spark 1.3
Muse Spark 1.3 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-rates
Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Spark 1.3
Updated September 30, 2026. We do not rank this pair: at least one has no public score. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.
Both of these models will change. Get the price, version and retirement notices for the pair, each with its source. Follow model changes
Share or export
Decision reading
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. 5 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.
- Shared results
- 5
- Gemini 4 Argon only
- 12
- Muse Spark 1.3 only
- 10
- Like-for-like categories
- 0 / 8
Estimated: Gemini 4 ArgonHow the comparison works
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.
Cache-heavy agent loop cost
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
Muse Spark 1.3
Muse Spark 1.3 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
Muse Spark 1.3
Muse Spark 1.3 has the lower estimated token cost for this stated workload. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Confidence: listed-ratesCoding 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: limitedAgentic 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: limitedLong documents
Prompts that approach the documented context limit
Not enough matched evidence
A complete context comparison is not sourced.
Confidence: limited
Which one for a specific job
Choose a job from the LLM Selector's task catalog to see the category row it rests on, under the same basis rules as the table below. A directional row stays directional; choosing a job never creates a winner.
The same task catalog as the LLM Selector. Each job names the evidence surface it rests on; nothing here adds a new score.
68.4Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.3
Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.7
The coding row is not comparable on the public lane: at least one model is not measured or not ranked there.
Coding scores combine specific tasks and setups. Match the editor, harness, and effort to your workflow.
Same basis rules as the category table below
What is actually comparable
Shared results can support a head-to-head reading. Results present for only one model describe coverage, not superiority.
12 Gemini 4 Argon only
5 Shared
10 Muse Spark 1.3 only
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.
Too few matched category axes support a radar. The ruled list below shows only shared benchmark results; positions use each benchmark’s normalized display scale when available.
OSWorld 2.0Agentic
Normalized gap 2.3Gemini 4 Argon:69.2%Muse Spark 1.3:66.9%AutomationBenchAgentic
Normalized gap 1.9Gemini 4 Argon:51.3%Muse Spark 1.3:49.4%
Bars run 0–100 on each benchmark’s normalized display scale
Category results, on a stated basis
Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.7 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- Gemini 4 Argon
- 63.7
- Estimated · #14/119
- Muse Spark 1.3
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 7 vs 8 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Coding
Not comparable- Gemini 4 Argon
- 68.4
- Supported · #8/144
- Muse Spark 1.3
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 4 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Reasoning
Not comparable- Gemini 4 Argon
- 77.1
- Unranked · 3 rankable rows
- Muse Spark 1.3
- 79.4
- #7/27
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multimodal
Not comparable- Gemini 4 Argon
- Not ranked
- Muse Spark 1.3
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Knowledge
Not comparable- Gemini 4 Argon
- 72.9
- Supported · #11/170
- Muse Spark 1.3
- Not ranked
- Basis
- BenchAlign v5.7 lane · 1 vs 0 public rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Multilingual
Not comparable- Gemini 4 Argon
- Not ranked
- Muse Spark 1.3
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Instruction following
Not comparable- Gemini 4 Argon
- Not ranked
- Muse Spark 1.3
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
Math
Not comparable- Gemini 4 Argon
- Not ranked
- Muse Spark 1.3
- Not ranked
- Basis
- Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
- Reading
- Not comparable
| Category | Gemini 4 Argon | Muse Spark 1.3 | Basis | Reading |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agentic | 63.7Estimated · #14/119 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.7 lane · 7 vs 8 public rows | Not comparable |
| Coding | 68.4Supported · #8/144 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.7 lane · 4 vs 4 public rows | Not comparable |
| Reasoning | 77.1Unranked · 3 rankable rows | 79.4#7/27 | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Multimodal | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Knowledge | 72.9Supported · #11/170 | Not ranked | Not comparableBenchAlign v5.7 lane · 1 vs 0 public rows | Not comparable |
| Multilingual | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Instruction following | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
| Math | Not ranked | Not ranked | Not comparableProvisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows | Not comparable |
Ranks count the models scored in each category’s lane, so the agentic, coding, and knowledge denominators (BenchAlign v5.7) differ from the provisional-lane categories. Unranked scores sit on the provisional lane’s scale but never name a winner. Like-for-like rows within 0.5 points read as a practical tie.
Supported evidence per lane · bars run 0–100Methodology
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
- Gemini 4 Argon
- $0.007
- Fit state unavailable
- Muse Spark 1.3
- $0.00338
- Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.3 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Repository review
50K fresh input + 3K output tokens
- Gemini 4 Argon
- $0.13
- Fit state unavailable
- Muse Spark 1.3
- $0.07525
- Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.3 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cache-heavy agent loop
200K cached + 20K fresh input + 10K output tokens
- Gemini 4 Argon
- $0.16
- Fit state unavailable
- Muse Spark 1.3
- $0.0975
- Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.3 has the lower modeled cost
Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Cached input falls back to the list input rate only where a cached rate is unpublished
Specification differences
Sourced differences are shown directly. Missing facts stay explicit instead of being inferred from a model name or family.
SpecificationGemini 4 ArgonMuse Spark 1.3
Context window
Maximum documented context; output-token limits may be lower.
Gemini 4 Argon
Not sourced
Google Gemini 4 Argon announcementMuse Spark 1.3
API model ID
Gemini 4 Argon
Not sourced
Muse Spark 1.3
muse-spark-1.3
Meta Muse Spark 1.3 model pageCached-input rate
A missing cached-input rate falls back to the listed input rate only in the stated workload estimate.
Gemini 4 Argon
$0.1 per 1M cached input tokens
Google Gemini 4 Argon announcementMuse Spark 1.3
$0.15 per 1M cached input tokens
Meta: Muse Spark 1.3 model pageDocumented inputs
Gemini 4 Argon
Not sourced
Muse Spark 1.3
text, image, video, document
Meta Muse Spark 1.3 model pageDocumented outputs
Gemini 4 Argon
Not sourced
Muse Spark 1.3
Provider availability
Gemini 4 Argon
Limited Access · Fairwind Program
Google Gemini 4 Argon announcementMuse Spark 1.3
Generally Available · Meta Model API, Muse Code
Meta AI Research Muse Spark 1.3 launchReasoning profile
Gemini 4 Argon
Reasoning
Muse Spark 1.3
Reasoning
Weight access
Gemini 4 Argon
Proprietary
Muse Spark 1.3
Proprietary
License
Gemini 4 Argon
Proprietary
Muse Spark 1.3
Proprietary
Release date
Gemini 4 Argon
2026-09-30
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
- At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner.
- Workload cost
- Repository review: $0.13 vs $0.07525. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.16 vs $0.0975.
- Context tradeoff
- A complete documented context comparison is not available.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.
Questions
Which is better, Gemini 4 Argon or Muse Spark 1.3?
At least one model is not scored in the current public ranking lane, so the page does not name an overall quality winner. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.
Which is better for coding, Gemini 4 Argon 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, Gemini 4 Argon 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, Gemini 4 Argon or Muse Spark 1.3?
For the stated presets, chat costs $0.007 on Gemini 4 Argon and $0.00337 on Muse Spark 1.3; repository review costs $0.13 and $0.07525; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.16 and $0.0975. Costs use the listed standard API rates.
Which has the larger context window, Gemini 4 Argon or Muse Spark 1.3?
A complete documented context-window comparison is not available.
Benchmark evidence
The full public result ledger is available for audit without forcing a wide desktop table onto a phone.
Browse raw public benchmark evidence27 rows
Agentic
AutomationBench
Gemini 4 Argon51.3%SourceMuse Spark 1.349.4%SourceGemini 4 Argon leads this result
Finance Agent v2
Gemini 4 Argon65.4%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 4.0
Gemini 4 Argon57.40%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
Agents' Last Exam
Gemini 4 Argon39.5%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
OSWorld 2.0
Gemini 4 Argon69.2%SourceMuse Spark 1.366.9%SourceGemini 4 Argon leads this result
CWE-bench v1
Shared sourceGemini 4 Argon68.0%Muse Spark 1.355.0%Gemini 4 Argon leads this result
Terminal-Bench-Science 0.1 (6x verifier timeout)
Gemini 4 Argon57.6%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.388.8%SourceNot directly comparable
JobBench
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.364.9%SourceNot directly comparable
DeepSearchQA
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.389.4%SourceNot directly comparable
ApprenticeBench
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.319%SourceNot directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.372.3%SourceNot directly comparable
Coding
DeepSWE
Gemini 4 Argon77.9%SourceMuse Spark 1.375.4%SourceGemini 4 Argon leads this result
FrontierSWE v2
Gemini 4 Argon55.1%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
Vibe Code Bench
Gemini 4 Argon91.90%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
PostTrainBench v1.1
Gemini 4 Argon45.3%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.1
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.388.8%SourceNot directly comparable
SWE-Atlas Codebase QnA
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.359.4%SourceNot directly comparable
cursorBench40
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.341.6%SourceNot directly comparable
Reasoning
Graphwalks BFS 128K
Gemini 4 Argon99.7%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
GraphWalks BFS 256K–1M
Gemini 4 Argon84.2%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
MRCR v2 256K-512K
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.398.5%SourceNot directly comparable
MRCR v2 512K-1M
Gemini 4 Argon—Muse Spark 1.398.1%SourceNot directly comparable
Multimodal
Knowledge
LABBench2
Gemini 4 Argon88.8%SourceMuse Spark 1.3—Not directly comparable
Instruction following
Gray Swan IPI (15 attempts)
Shared sourceGemini 4 Argon0.7%Muse Spark 1.315.9%Gemini 4 Argon leads this result
27 public results · 5 shared
Watch Gemini 4 Argon vs Muse Spark 1.3
One weekly email when material rank, price, or benchmark evidence changes make this matchup worth revisiting.
Read a sample issueJoin 2,000+ readers.
Last updated September 30, 2026