Model comparison
Inkling vs Muse Spark 1.1
Head-to-head evidence from 7 shared benchmark results across 4 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.
Verified leaderboard positions: Inkling #17; Muse Spark 1.1 unranked
BenchAlign evidence: Inkling not scored; Muse Spark 1.1 supported. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.
Evidence parity. Inkling and Muse Spark 1.1 share 7 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 9 results are unique to Inkling; 32 to Muse Spark 1.1.
Updated July 15, 2026- Shared results
- 7
- Inkling only
- 9
- Muse Spark 1.1 only
- 32
- Comparable categories
- 4 / 8
Pick Muse Spark 1.1 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Inkling only becomes the better choice if coding is the priority or you would rather avoid the extra latency and token burn of a reasoning model.
Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 7 shared benchmark results across 4 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.
Why this result
Muse Spark 1.1 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 83 to 69. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.
Muse Spark 1.1's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 88.4 against 76.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 63.8% to 80%. Inkling does hit back in coding, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.
Muse Spark 1.1 is the reasoning model in the pair, while Inkling 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.
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 | Inkling | Δ | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multimodal | Inkling76.5 | Margin→ 11.9 | Muse Spark 1.188.4 |
| Agentic | Inkling69.4 | Margin→ 11.0 | Muse Spark 1.180.4 |
| Knowledge | Inkling51.7 | Margin→ 10.4 | Muse Spark 1.162.1 |
| Coding | Inkling68.6 | Margin← 7.1 | Muse Spark 1.161.5 |
| Math | Inkling97.1 | MarginNo overlap | Muse Spark 1.1Not measured |
| Inst. Following | Inkling79.8 | MarginNo overlap | Muse Spark 1.1Not measured |
Decisive benchmark drivers
The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.
More
- Source ↗
Terminal-Bench 2.0
AgenticA 63.8%B 80%Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 16.2Terminal-Bench 2.0: Inkling scored 63.8%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 80%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
HLE
KnowledgeA 46%B 62.1%Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 16.1HLE: Inkling scored 46%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 62.1%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
SWE-bench Pro
CodingA 54.3%B 61.5%Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 7.2SWE-bench Pro: Inkling scored 54.3%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 61.5%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark. - Source ↗
CharXiv
MultimodalA 82%B 88.4%Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 6.4CharXiv: Inkling scored 82%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 88.4%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark.
Operational comparison
Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.
| Metric | Inkling | Muse Spark 1.1 | Comparison |
|---|---|---|---|
| Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokens | Inkling$1.87 input / $4.68 output | Muse Spark 1.1Not available | A complete price comparison is not available. |
| Generation speedtokens per second | InklingNot available | Muse Spark 1.1Not available | A complete speed comparison is not available. |
| First-answer latencyseconds to first token | InklingNot available | Muse Spark 1.1Not available | A complete latency comparison is not available. |
| Context windowmaximum listed tokens | Inkling1M | Muse Spark 1.11M | Listed context windows are equal. |
Benchmark Deep Dive
AgenticMuse Spark 1.1 wins22 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Muse Spark 1.1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.8% | 80% | Muse Spark 1.1 leads |
| BrowseCompSource | 77.1% | — | Not comparable |
| MCP AtlasSource | 74.1% | 88.1% | Muse Spark 1.1 leads |
| Design Arena Agentic Web DevSource | 1258 | — | Not comparable |
| ToolathlonSource | — | 75.6% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld-VerifiedSource | — | 80.8% | Not comparable |
| WebArena-VerifiedSource | — | 69% | Not comparable |
| DeepSearchQASource | — | 84.9% | Not comparable |
| CyberGymSource | — | 59.0% | Not comparable |
| Finance Agent v2Source | — | 57.2% | Not comparable |
| deepSweSource | — | 53.3% | Not comparable |
| OSWorld 2.0Source | — | 14.2% | Not comparable |
| JobBenchSource | — | 54.7% | Not comparable |
| CybenchSource | — | 92.9% | Not comparable |
| ExploitGymSource | — | 0.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Agentic IndexSource | — | 37.5% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 43.7% | Not comparable |
| GDPval-AASource | — | 1374 | Not comparable |
| AA BriefcaseSource | — | 863 | Not comparable |
| AA AutomationBenchSource | — | 42.8% | Not comparable |
| AA Harvey LABSource | — | 8.3% | Not comparable |
| AA Tau3 BankingSource | — | 25.2% | Not comparable |
CodingInkling wins6 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Muse Spark 1.1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| SWE-bench VerifiedSource | 77.6% | — | Not comparable |
| SWE-bench ProSource | 54.3% | 61.5% | Muse Spark 1.1 leads |
| Terminal-Bench 2.0Source | 63.8% | 80.0% | Muse Spark 1.1 leads |
| AA Coding IndexSource | — | 71.3% | Not comparable |
| AA-SciCodeSource | — | 58.2% | Not comparable |
| AA Terminal-Bench 2.1Source | — | 77.9% | Not comparable |
Reasoning3 benchmarks
KnowledgeMuse Spark 1.1 wins11 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Muse Spark 1.1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQASource | 87.9% | — | Not comparable |
| GPQA-DSource | 87.9% | — | Not comparable |
| HLESource | 46% | 62.1% | Muse Spark 1.1 leads |
| HLE w/o toolsSource | 30% | 52.2% | Muse Spark 1.1 leads |
| HealthBench ProfessionalSource | — | 59.3% | Not comparable |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource | — | 50.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-GPQA DiamondSource | — | 89.8% | Not comparable |
| AA-HLESource | — | 45.1% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience IndexSource | — | 18.0% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience AccuracySource | — | 40.6% | Not comparable |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource | — | 38.1% | Not comparable |
Math1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Muse Spark 1.1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME26Source | 97.1% | — | Not comparable |
MultimodalMuse Spark 1.1 wins4 benchmarks
Inst. Following1 benchmarks
| Benchmark | Inkling | Muse Spark 1.1 | Result |
|---|---|---|---|
| IFBenchSource | 79.8% | — | Not comparable |
Frequently Asked Questions (5)
Which is better, Inkling or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 83 to 69. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 63.8% and 80%.
Which is better for knowledge tasks, Inkling or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.1 versus 51.7. Inside this category, HLE w/o tools is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for coding, Inkling or Muse Spark 1.1?
Inkling has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.6 versus 61.5. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for agentic tasks, Inkling or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 69.4. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Inkling or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 88.4 versus 76.5. Inside this category, CharXiv is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.
Related Comparisons
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.