Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

Inkling vs Muse Spark Open

Updated October 15, 2026. Rank says Muse Spark Open is ahead. Price, access, and your workload can each overturn that. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInAPI/MCP

Decision reading

Muse Spark Open has the higher public point estimate, 62.66 versus 52.61. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. 1 results are shared. Category rows resting on Estimated evidence or different benchmark sets are marked directional and do not name a winner.

Model A
Thinking Machines Lab logo

Thinking Machines Lab

52.61/100

Supported · Public rank #85

90% interval 42.3–62.9

Model B
Meta logo

Meta

62.66/100

Estimated · Public rank #45

Conditional range 48.3–77.0

Shared results
1
Inkling only
23
Muse Spark Open only
6
Like-for-like categories
2 / 8
Supported: Inkling · Estimated: Muse Spark Open. Conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.How 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.

  • Coding work

    Code generation, repair, and software-engineering tasks

    Muse Spark Open

    Muse Spark Open has the higher public coding point estimate, 56.1 to 33.9, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

    Confidence: limited
Show secondary and unsupported calls
  • Agentic work

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

    Not enough matched evidence

    Muse Spark Open is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like.

    Confidence: limited
  • Long documents

    Prompts that approach the documented context limit

    No clear pick

    The documented context windows are equal.

    Confidence: documented
  • 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

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

    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

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.

33.9Inkling56.1Muse Spark Open

Like-for-like · BenchAlign v5.8

Muse Spark Open has the higher coding point estimate. Conditional score ranges do not establish rank confidence.

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.

1 category rests on Estimated evidence or different evidence sets. Those rows remain visible for coverage context but do not name a winner.

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.

Category results, on a stated basis

Each row shows the public-lane category score for both models: the BenchAlign v5.8 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.

Coding

Like-for-like
Inkling
33.9
Supported · #82/150
Muse Spark Open
56.1
Supported · #29/150
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 6 vs 0 public rows
Reading
Muse Spark Open leads

Knowledge

Like-for-like
Inkling
54.6
Supported · #63/184
Muse Spark Open
64.6
Supported · #38/184
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 6 vs 0 public rows
Reading
Muse Spark Open leads · intervals overlap

Agentic

Directional only
Inkling
37.4
Supported · #73/127
Muse Spark Open
60.2
Estimated · #27/127
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 5 vs 4 public rows
Reading
Directional only

Reasoning

Not comparable
Inkling
79.0
#14/28
Muse Spark Open
79.6
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
Inkling
67.5
#35/54
Muse Spark Open
83.6
Unranked · 4 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
Inkling
Not ranked
Muse Spark Open
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
Inkling
87.6
#35/146
Muse Spark Open
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 1 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
Inkling
58.3
#11/12
Muse Spark Open
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 3 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 v5.8) 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

Inkling
$0.00421
Fits in one request
Muse Spark Open
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Muse Spark Open has no comparable published API token rate.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

Inkling
$0.10754
Fits in one request
Muse Spark Open
API rate not published
Fits in one request

Muse Spark Open has no comparable published API token rate.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

Inkling
$0.159
Fits in one request
Muse Spark Open
API rate not published
Fits in one request
Cached-input rate unavailable

Muse Spark Open has no comparable published API token rate.

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.

API model ID

Inkling

Not sourced

Muse Spark Open

Not sourced

Cached-input rate

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

Inkling

$0.374 per 1M cached input tokens

Muse Spark Open

No comparable hosted API rate

Meta AI Research blog

Provider availability

Inkling

Not sourced

Muse Spark Open

Open Weights · Hugging Face, Amazon SageMaker AI, Google Cloud Model Garden, Microsoft Foundry Models, self-hosted inference

Meta AI Research: Muse Spark Open

Reasoning profile

Inkling

Hybrid

Muse Spark Open

Reasoning

Weight access

Inkling

Open Weight

Muse Spark Open

Open Weight

License

Inkling

Open Weight

Muse Spark Open

Open Weight

Release date

Inkling

2026-07-15

Muse Spark Open

2026-10-15

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 Open has the higher public point estimate, 62.66 versus 52.61. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence.
Workload cost
A complete comparable API-rate estimate is not available for both models.
Context tradeoff
Both models list 1M.
Run the same representative tasks against both endpoints before changing production traffic.

Questions

Which is better, Inkling or Muse Spark Open?

Muse Spark Open has the higher public point estimate, 62.66 versus 52.61. Their conditional score ranges overlap. These ranges do not establish rank confidence. The page therefore keeps the decision tied to the specific documented workload.

Which is better for coding, Inkling or Muse Spark Open?

Muse Spark Open has the higher public coding point estimate, 56.1 to 33.9, with Supported evidence for both models. The conditional ranges do not establish rank confidence.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Inkling or Muse Spark Open?

Muse Spark Open scores higher for agentic tasks on the public lane, 60.2 to 37.4. Muse Spark Open is scored on Estimated evidence for agentic tasks, so the reading is directional rather than like-for-like. BenchLM does not name a winner for agentic tasks from a directional reading; read the shared benchmark rows directly and test the models on the same task set.

Which costs less, Inkling or Muse Spark Open?

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, Inkling or Muse Spark Open?

Both models list the same context window, 1M.

Benchmark evidence

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

Browse raw public benchmark evidence30 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Inkling63.8%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • BrowseComp

    Inkling77.1%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • MCP Atlas

    Inkling74.1%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open89.2%
    Source

    Muse Spark Open leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    Inkling47.6%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • CWE-bench v1

    Inkling37.0%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • JobBench

    Inkling—
    Muse Spark Open61.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/ tools

    Inkling—
    Muse Spark Open61.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon-Verified

    Inkling—
    Muse Spark Open72.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified

    Inkling77.6%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    Inkling54.3%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    Inkling63.8%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierSWE v2

    Inkling4.1%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench (Vals)

    Inkling85.5%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench (Vals)

    Inkling77.6%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

Multimodal

  • MMMU-Pro

    Inkling73.5%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv

    Inkling82%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • CharXiv w/o tools

    Inkling78.1%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • ZeroBench

    Inkling—
    Muse Spark Open50.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • BabyVision

    Inkling—
    Muse Spark Open80.2%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SimpleVQA

    Inkling—
    Muse Spark Open73.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • GPQA

    Inkling87.9%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    Inkling87.9%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE

    Inkling46%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • HLE w/o tools

    Inkling30%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA Diamond (Vals)

    Inkling87.1%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Vals)

    Inkling86.3%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • IFBench

    Inkling79.8%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME26

    Inkling97.1%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    Inkling33.333%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    Inkling4.878%
    Source
    Muse Spark Open—

    Not directly comparable

30 public results · 1 shared

Watch Inkling vs Muse Spark Open

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

Read a sample issue

Join 5,500+ readers.

Last updated October 15, 2026