Skip to main content

Model comparison

Muse Spark vs SWE-1.7

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 1 shared benchmark result across 1 category. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

71/100
Margin
3.0pts
winning →
Cognition
74/100
0 category wins1 category wins

BenchAlign evidence: Muse Spark supported; SWE-1.7 not scored. Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Muse Spark and SWE-1.7 share 1 comparable benchmark result. 1 of 8 categories are comparable. 40 results are unique to Muse Spark; 3 to SWE-1.7.

Updated July 16, 2026
Shared results
1
Muse Spark only
40
SWE-1.7 only
3
Comparable categories
1 / 8

Pick SWE-1.7 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Muse Spark only becomes the better choice if you need the larger 262K context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 1 shared benchmark result across 1 evidence category; 1 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

SWE-1.7 is clearly ahead on the provisional aggregate, 74 to 63. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

SWE-1.7's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 81.5 against 59. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 59% to 81.5%.

Muse Spark gives you the larger context window at 262K, compared with 256K for SWE-1.7.

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 scores and score margins for Muse Spark and SWE-1.7
CategoryMuse SparkΔSWE-1.7
AgenticMuse Spark59.0Margin 22.5SWE-1.781.5
CodingMuse Spark67.8MarginNo overlapSWE-1.7Not measured
ReasoningMuse Spark42.5MarginNo overlapSWE-1.7Not measured
KnowledgeMuse Spark50.4MarginNo overlapSWE-1.7Not measured
MathMuse Spark32.9MarginNo overlapSWE-1.7Not measured
MultimodalMuse Spark82.5MarginNo overlapSWE-1.7Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Muse SparkB · SWE-1.7
  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 59%B 81.5%
    Winner: SWE-1.7Δ 22.5
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Muse Spark scored 59%; SWE-1.7 scored 81.5%. SWE-1.7 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricMuse SparkSWE-1.7Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensMuse SparkNot availableSWE-1.7Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondMuse SparkNot availableSWE-1.7Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenMuse SparkNot availableSWE-1.7Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensMuse Spark262KSWE-1.7256KMuse Spark lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticSWE-1.7 wins
BenchmarkMuse SparkSWE-1.7Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59%81.5%SWE-1.7 leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 91.5%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 74.8%Not comparable
CyberGymSource 43.5%Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 63.8%Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 28.7%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 32.2%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1144Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkMuse SparkSWE-1.7Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.4%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 52.4%Not comparable
LiveCodeBench ProSource 80.0%Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 19.67%Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 58.6%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench HardSource 45.5%Not comparable
AA-SciCodeSource 51.5%Not comparable
FrontierCodeSource 42.3%Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 81.5%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource 77.8%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkMuse SparkSWE-1.7Result
ARC-AGI-2Source 42.5%Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 69.7%Not comparable
CritPtSource 11.3%Not comparable
Knowledge
BenchmarkMuse SparkSWE-1.7Result
GPQA-DSource 89.5%Not comparable
HLESource 50.4%Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource 42.8%Not comparable
HealthBench HardSource 42.8%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source 52.6%Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 43.1%Not comparable
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 88.4%Not comparable
AA-HLESource 39.9%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 4.1%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 44.6%Not comparable
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 73.2%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkMuse SparkSWE-1.7Result
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 39.000%Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 14.600%Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkMuse SparkSWE-1.7Result
CharXivSource 86.4%Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 80.4%Not comparable
ERQASource 64.7%Not comparable
SimpleVQASource 71.3%Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 84.1%Not comparable
ZeroBenchSource 33.0%Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 78.4%Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 1444Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 80.5%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkMuse SparkSWE-1.7Result
AA-IFBenchSource 75.9%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (2)

Which is better, Muse Spark or SWE-1.7?

SWE-1.7 is ahead on BenchLM's provisional leaderboard, 74 to 63. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 59% and 81.5%.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Muse Spark or SWE-1.7?

SWE-1.7 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 81.5 versus 59. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Last updated: July 16, 2026

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.