Claude Sonnet 5.5 vs Muse Spark 1.1
Anthropic · US | Meta · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick Claude Sonnet 5.5 for terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3% or same $2/$10 per million token pricing as sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/mtok as of october 7, 2026. Pick Muse Spark 1.1 for scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported) or subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck. On a tight budget at scale, Muse Spark 1.1 is the value pick.
Claude Sonnet 5.5 (Anthropic) and Muse Spark 1.1 (Meta) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. Claude Sonnet 5.5 is anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%). Muse Spark 1.1 is meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding. They diverge most on price and context window — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: Muse Spark 1.1 is about 1.6× cheaper on input ($1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens vs $2/$10 per 1M tokens) — modest, but it adds up at steady volume.
- ▸Context window: 1M tokens vs 1M — within a few percent of each other, so treat this as a tie and test on your own long inputs, since usable recall varies by model.
- ▸Recency: Claude Sonnet 5.5 is the newer model by about 3 months (released September 28, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Claude Sonnet 5.5 | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Anthropic (US) | Meta (US) |
| Released | September 28, 2026 | July 9, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) | 1M (~1,573 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $2/$10 per 1M tokens | $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | No — API only |
| Modalities | text, image, code | text, image, video, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | Not published | 54.1% |
Who wins what
Terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from Claude Sonnet 5's 10.3%
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Muse Spark 1.1 is comparatively weak here — not the coding leader its launch framing implied — Meta's own report concedes it trails Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 on every coding benchmark
Same $2/$10 per million token pricing as Sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/MTok as of October 7, 2026
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%) — and it is the newer of the two.
Scores close to Opus 5.5 on several benchmarks (e.g. GDPval-AA v2.1 knowledge-work Elo) at a fraction of the cost
Claude Sonnet 5.5
Muse Spark 1.1 is comparatively weak here — closed weights end the free, self-hostable Llama path — this is the first model Meta has charged for
Scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported)
Muse Spark 1.1
At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Sonnet 5.5 ($2/$10 per 1M tokens), and that gap compounds at volume.
Subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck
Muse Spark 1.1
Meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding — and it runs cheaper at $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens.
Professional agentic work — 54.7 on JobBench, a wide margin over rivals (vendor-reported)
Muse Spark 1.1
Muse Spark 1.1 lists professional agentic work — 54.7 on JobBench, a wide margin over rivals (vendor-reported) among its strengths; Claude Sonnet 5.5 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
Muse Spark 1.1
At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens, it is the cheaper of the two — the gap dominates the bill on high-volume workloads.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Muse Spark 1.1
At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens it undercuts Claude Sonnet 5.5, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Muse Spark 1.1
Larger 1M window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3%
→ Claude Sonnet 5.5
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported)
→ Muse Spark 1.1
That is its strongest area.
Claude Sonnet 5.5: where it fits
Anthropic's September 28, 2026 mid-tier update — same $2/$10 pricing as Sonnet 5 but a large agentic-coding jump (Terminal-Bench 4.0: 70.6% vs 10.3%). Released September 28, 2026 by Anthropic, it is built for terminal-Bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from Claude Sonnet 5's 10.3%, same $2/$10 per million token pricing as Sonnet 5, with cache-read price cut 50% to $0.10/MTok as of October 7, 2026, scores close to Opus 5.5 on several benchmarks (e.g. GDPval-AA v2.1 knowledge-work Elo) at a fraction of the cost, and anthropic highlights stronger document/slide generation, spreadsheet work, and visual chart recognition (Chartography: 61.6%).
Its trade-offs are real: anthropic is explicit that Opus 5.5 'remains clearly stronger' on complex, open-ended work requiring sustained judgment, 1M-token context isn't uniformly available across every platform/plan, consistent with the rest of the 5.5 family, and mid-tier update released a week after Opus 5.5 (Sept 22) — Haiku 5.5 followed Oct 7 to complete the family. At $2 in / $10 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Muse Spark 1.1: where it fits
Meta's first paid, closed-weight frontier model — class-leading agentic tool use at a quarter of rivals' price, but it trails on coding. Released July 9, 2026 by Meta, it is built for scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported), subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck, professional agentic work — 54.7 on JobBench, a wide margin over rivals (vendor-reported), and managing its own context: it compacts the 1M window mid-run instead of relying on external windowing.
Its trade-offs: not the coding leader its launch framing implied — Meta's own report concedes it trails Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 on every coding benchmark, the 1M window oversells its recall: 54.1 on MRCR v2 at 1M against GPT-5.5's 74.0, closed weights end the free, self-hostable Llama path — this is the first model Meta has charged for, and uS-only public preview behind a waitlist, and every benchmark is vendor-reported with no third-party replication. At $1.25 in / $4.25 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Spark 1.1 overlap enough that the right pick depends on your specific job. Muse Spark 1.1 costs less per token; Muse Spark 1.1 holds the larger context; and each leads in its own area — Claude Sonnet 5.5 for terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3%, Muse Spark 1.1 for scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported). Rather than crowning one, run the same hard task through both once and let the results decide.
Want both Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Spark 1.1 without two subscriptions? LumiChats gives you these plus 40+ models under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day) — draft with one, cross-check with the other.
See pricingFrequently asked questions
Is Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?
Public SWE-Bench figures are not available for either model, so the honest test is your own repository — run an identical real bug through both. By design, Claude Sonnet 5.5 leans toward terminal-bench 4.0 agentic coding jumps to 70.6%, up from claude sonnet 5's 10.3% while Muse Spark 1.1 leans toward scaled tool use — 88.1 on mcp atlas, ahead of opus 4.8 and gpt-5.5 (vendor-reported), and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper — $2/$10 per 1M tokens vs $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens, roughly 1.6× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 1M tokens vs 1M is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Claude Sonnet 5.5 and Muse Spark 1.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Claude Sonnet 5.5, Muse Spark 1.1 and 40+ others under one ₹69/day pass (about $1/day), so you can draft with one and cross-check with the other instead of buying two subscriptions.
Which is newer, Claude Sonnet 5.5 or Muse Spark 1.1?
Claude Sonnet 5.5 — released September 28, 2026, about 3 months after Muse Spark 1.1.
Related comparisons
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.