Skip to main content
BenchLM
Data

MiniMax M2.7 vs Muse Spark 1.3

Updated October 17, 2026. We do not rank this pair: at least one has no public score. Public scores include evidence status and uncertainty.

Share or export
Share on XLinkedInAPI/MCP

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. 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
MiniMax logo

MiniMax

48.17/100

Supported · Public rank #105

90% interval 36.8–59.5

Model B
Meta logo

Meta

—

Evidence status unavailable

90% interval unavailable

Shared results
1
MiniMax M2.7 only
28
Muse Spark 1.3 only
19
Like-for-like categories
0 / 8
Supported: MiniMax M2.7How 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.

  • 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

    MiniMax M2.7

    MiniMax M2.7 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

    MiniMax M2.7

    MiniMax M2.7 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. MiniMax M2.7 does not fit this workload in one request. MiniMax M2.7 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

    Confidence: rate-fallback

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.

34.4MiniMax M2.7—Muse Spark 1.3

Not comparable · BenchAlign v5.8

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.

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.

Agentic

Not comparable
MiniMax M2.7
32.3
Supported · #90/128
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 8 vs 9 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Coding

Not comparable
MiniMax M2.7
34.4
Supported · #80/150
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 12 vs 6 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Reasoning

Not comparable
MiniMax M2.7
79.6
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Muse Spark 1.3
82.9
#6/28
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multimodal

Not comparable
MiniMax M2.7
Not ranked
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Knowledge

Not comparable
MiniMax M2.7
46.1
Supported · #93/184
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
BenchAlign v5.8 lane · 5 vs 0 public rows
Reading
Not comparable

Multilingual

Not comparable
MiniMax M2.7
Not ranked
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Instruction following

Not comparable
MiniMax M2.7
93.0
#13/148
Muse Spark 1.3
Not ranked
Basis
Provisional lane · 0 vs 0 weighted rows
Reading
Not comparable

Math

Not comparable
MiniMax M2.7
70.5
Unranked · 4 rankable rows
Muse Spark 1.3
78.5
Unranked · 2 rankable rows
Basis
Provisional lane · 2 vs 2 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

MiniMax M2.7
$0.0009
Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.3
$0.00338
Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.7 has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Repository review

50K fresh input + 3K output tokens

MiniMax M2.7
$0.0186
Fits in one request
Muse Spark 1.3
$0.07525
Fits in one request

MiniMax M2.7 has the lower modeled cost

Costs use the listed standard API rates.

Cache-heavy agent loop

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

MiniMax M2.7
$0.078
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

MiniMax M2.7 does not fit this workload in one request. MiniMax M2.7 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input 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.

Cached-input rate

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

MiniMax M2.7

Not published

Muse Spark 1.3

$0.15 per 1M cached input tokens

Meta: Muse Spark 1.3 model page

Reasoning profile

MiniMax M2.7

Non-Reasoning

Muse Spark 1.3

Reasoning

Weight access

MiniMax M2.7

Open Weight

Muse Spark 1.3

Proprietary

License

MiniMax M2.7

Open Weight

Muse Spark 1.3

Proprietary

Release date

MiniMax M2.7

2026-03-18

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: $0.0186 vs $0.07525. Cache-heavy agent loop: $0.078 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.

Questions

Which is better, MiniMax M2.7 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, MiniMax M2.7 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, MiniMax M2.7 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, MiniMax M2.7 or Muse Spark 1.3?

For the stated presets, chat costs $0.0009 on MiniMax M2.7 and $0.00337 on Muse Spark 1.3; repository review costs $0.0186 and $0.07525; the cache-heavy agent loop costs $0.078 and $0.0975. MiniMax M2.7 does not fit this workload in one request. MiniMax M2.7 has no published cached-input rate, so cached tokens use its listed input rate.

Which has the larger context window, MiniMax M2.7 or Muse Spark 1.3?

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

Benchmark evidence

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

Browse raw public benchmark evidence48 rows

Agentic

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    MiniMax M2.757%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • τ³-bench results

    MiniMax M2.767.6%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Toolathlon

    MiniMax M2.746.3%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • MLE-Bench Lite

    MiniMax M2.766.6%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • MM-ClawBench

    MiniMax M2.762.7%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Claw-Eval

    MiniMax M2.748.7%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Gert Labs

    MiniMax M2.740.40%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1 (Vals)

    MiniMax M2.748.7%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.372.3%
    Source

    Muse Spark 1.3 leads this result

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.388.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • JobBench

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.364.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • OSWorld 2.0

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.366.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSearchQA

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.389.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • AutomationBench

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.349.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • ApprenticeBench

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.319%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CWE-bench v1

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.355.0%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MazeBench

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.30%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Coding

  • SWE-bench Verified*

    MiniMax M2.775.4%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench Pro

    MiniMax M2.756.2%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-Rebench

    MiniMax M2.751.9%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE Multilingual

    MiniMax M2.776.5%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Multi-SWE Bench

    MiniMax M2.752.7%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • VIBE-Pro

    MiniMax M2.755.6%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • NL2Repo

    MiniMax M2.739.8%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.0

    MiniMax M2.757.0%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Vibe Code Bench

    MiniMax M2.727.04%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • React Native Evals

    MiniMax M2.771.4%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • LiveCodeBench (Vals)

    MiniMax M2.779.9%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-bench (Vals)

    MiniMax M2.773.8%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • Terminal-Bench 2.1

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.388.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • DeepSWE

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.375.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • SWE-Atlas Codebase QnA

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.359.4%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • CursorBench 4.0

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.341.6%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • Bug Hunt Bench

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.332.2 fixes
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierSWE v2

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.325.8%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Reasoning

  • MRCR v2 256K-512K

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.398.5%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • MRCR v2 512K-1M

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.398.1%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Knowledge

  • HLE

    MiniMax M2.728%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA-D

    MiniMax M2.787.0%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Arcee)

    MiniMax M2.780.8%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • GPQA Diamond (Vals)

    MiniMax M2.786.6%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • MMLU-Pro (Vals)

    MiniMax M2.780.4%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

Instruction following

  • Gray Swan IPI (15 attempts)

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.315.9%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

Math

  • AIME25 (Arcee)

    MiniMax M2.780.0%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • AIME26

    MiniMax M2.789.8%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Nov 2025

    MiniMax M2.781.0%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • HMMT Feb 2026

    MiniMax M2.772.7%
    Source
    Muse Spark 1.3—

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.374.035%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

  • FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)

    MiniMax M2.7—
    Muse Spark 1.346.341%
    Source

    Not directly comparable

48 public results · 1 shared

Watch MiniMax M2.7 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 5,600+ readers.

Last updated October 17, 2026