Pick DeepSeek V4-Pro for open-weight 1.6t moe (~49b active) — deepseek's largest, self-hostable or 1m-token context with up to 384k output tokens. 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. Choose DeepSeek V4-Pro if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Muse Spark 1.1 if you want a managed API.
DeepSeek V4-Pro (DeepSeek, China) and Muse Spark 1.1 (Meta, US) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. DeepSeek V4-Pro is deepSeek's 1.6-trillion-parameter open-weight model at $0.435/$0.87 — strong open-weight coding and a 1M context at a fraction of flagship prices. 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, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences
Price: DeepSeek V4-Pro is about 2.9× cheaper on input ($0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens vs $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
Context window: 1M 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: Muse Spark 1.1 is the newer model by about 3 months (released July 9, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-US matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Specifications
Spec
DeepSeek V4-Pro
Muse Spark 1.1
Provider
DeepSeek (China)
Meta (US)
Released
April 24, 2026
July 9, 2026
Context window
1M (~1,500 pages)
1M (~1,573 pages)
Price (in/out)
$0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens
$1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens
Open weight?
Yes — self-hostable
No — API only
Modalities
text, code
text, image, video, code
SWE-Bench Verified
Not published
Not published
MRCR v2 @ 1M
Not published
54.1%
Who wins what
Open-weight 1.6T MoE (~49B active) — DeepSeek's largest, self-hostable: DeepSeek V4-Pro — Open weights make this possible at all — Muse Spark 1.1 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
1M-token context with up to 384K output tokens: DeepSeek V4-Pro — DeepSeek's 1.6-trillion-parameter open-weight model at $0.435/$0.87 — strong open-weight coding and a 1M context at a fraction of flagship prices — and it runs cheaper at $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens.
Permanent low pricing at $0.435/$0.87 per million, set May 2026: DeepSeek V4-Pro — DeepSeek's 1.6-trillion-parameter open-weight model at $0.435/$0.87 — strong open-weight coding and a 1M context at a fraction of flagship prices — and its weights are open while Muse Spark 1.1 is API-only.
Scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported): 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 is the newer of the two.
Subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck: Muse Spark 1.1 — Muse Spark 1.1 lists subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck among its strengths; DeepSeek V4-Pro does not.
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; DeepSeek V4-Pro does not.
Lowest cost at scale: DeepSeek V4-Pro — At $0.435/$0.87 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: DeepSeek V4-Pro — At $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens it undercuts Muse Spark 1.1, 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.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs: DeepSeek V4-Pro — Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Muse Spark 1.1 is API-only.
Anyone whose priority is open-weight 1.6t moe (~49b active) — deepseek's largest, self-hostable: DeepSeek V4-Pro — 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.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules: Muse Spark 1.1 or DeepSeek V4-Pro — Origin (China vs US) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
DeepSeek V4-Pro: where it fits
DeepSeek's 1.6-trillion-parameter open-weight model at $0.435/$0.87 — strong open-weight coding and a 1M context at a fraction of flagship prices. Released April 24, 2026 by DeepSeek, it is built for open-weight 1.6T MoE (~49B active) — DeepSeek's largest, self-hostable, 1M-token context with up to 384K output tokens, permanent low pricing at $0.435/$0.87 per million, set May 2026, and sources place it near the top of open-weight coding, around 80 on SWE-Bench Verified.
Its trade-offs are real: independent SWE-Bench Verified placement is inconsistent across sources, pro and Pro-Max variants are quoted with different scores, text and code only — no image, audio or video, and overlaps DeepSeek V4 and V3.2 already in this comparison. At $0.435 in / $0.87 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget 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
The defining split here is open vs. closed. DeepSeek V4-Pro gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Muse Spark 1.1 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Frequently asked questions
Is DeepSeek V4-Pro 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, DeepSeek V4-Pro leans toward open-weight 1.6t moe (~49b active) — deepseek's largest, self-hostable 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, DeepSeek V4-Pro or Muse Spark 1.1?
DeepSeek V4-Pro is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Muse Spark 1.1 is API-metered at $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 1M vs 1M is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both DeepSeek V4-Pro and Muse Spark 1.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you DeepSeek V4-Pro, 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, DeepSeek V4-Pro or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 — released July 9, 2026, about 3 months after DeepSeek V4-Pro.
DeepSeek V4-Pro vs Muse Spark 1.1
DeepSeek · China | Meta · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Pick DeepSeek V4-Pro for open-weight 1.6t moe (~49b active) — deepseek's largest, self-hostable or 1m-token context with up to 384k output tokens. 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. Choose DeepSeek V4-Pro if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Muse Spark 1.1 if you want a managed API.
DeepSeek V4-Pro (DeepSeek, China) and Muse Spark 1.1 (Meta, US) line up two different AI ecosystems against each other — a comparison that is as much about cost philosophy and openness as raw capability. DeepSeek V4-Pro is deepSeek's 1.6-trillion-parameter open-weight model at $0.435/$0.87 — strong open-weight coding and a 1M context at a fraction of flagship prices. 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, context window and open vs. closed weights — each quantified below from the models' real specs.
Key differences at a glance
▸Price: DeepSeek V4-Pro is about 2.9× cheaper on input ($0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens vs $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
▸Context window: 1M 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: Muse Spark 1.1 is the newer model by about 3 months (released July 9, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
▸Ecosystem: this is a China-vs-US matchup — they differ in pricing philosophy, data-residency options, and tooling ecosystems, not only benchmarks.
Open weights make this possible at all — Muse Spark 1.1 is API-only, so it cannot leave the vendor's servers.
1M-token context with up to 384K output tokens
DeepSeek V4-Pro
DeepSeek's 1.6-trillion-parameter open-weight model at $0.435/$0.87 — strong open-weight coding and a 1M context at a fraction of flagship prices — and it runs cheaper at $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens.
Permanent low pricing at $0.435/$0.87 per million, set May 2026
DeepSeek V4-Pro
DeepSeek's 1.6-trillion-parameter open-weight model at $0.435/$0.87 — strong open-weight coding and a 1M context at a fraction of flagship prices — and its weights are open while Muse Spark 1.1 is API-only.
Scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported)
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 is the newer of the two.
Subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck
Muse Spark 1.1
Muse Spark 1.1 lists subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck among its strengths; DeepSeek V4-Pro does not.
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; DeepSeek V4-Pro does not.
Lowest cost at scale
DeepSeek V4-Pro
At $0.435/$0.87 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
→ DeepSeek V4-Pro
At $0.435/$0.87 per 1M tokens it undercuts Muse Spark 1.1, 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.
A team with data-privacy or self-hosting needs
→ DeepSeek V4-Pro
Open weights let you run it on your own hardware; Muse Spark 1.1 is API-only.
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.
An enterprise with regional data-residency rules
→ Muse Spark 1.1 or DeepSeek V4-Pro
Origin (China vs US) affects where data is processed and which compliance regime applies — check the provider's terms for your region.
DeepSeek V4-Pro: where it fits
DeepSeek's 1.6-trillion-parameter open-weight model at $0.435/$0.87 — strong open-weight coding and a 1M context at a fraction of flagship prices. Released April 24, 2026 by DeepSeek, it is built for open-weight 1.6T MoE (~49B active) — DeepSeek's largest, self-hostable, 1M-token context with up to 384K output tokens, permanent low pricing at $0.435/$0.87 per million, set May 2026, and sources place it near the top of open-weight coding, around 80 on SWE-Bench Verified.
Its trade-offs are real: independent SWE-Bench Verified placement is inconsistent across sources, pro and Pro-Max variants are quoted with different scores, text and code only — no image, audio or video, and overlaps DeepSeek V4 and V3.2 already in this comparison. At $0.435 in / $0.87 out per million tokens, it sits in the budget 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
The defining split here is open vs. closed. DeepSeek V4-Pro gives you weights you control — self-host it, fine-tune it, keep data in-house, pay only for hardware. Muse Spark 1.1 gives you a managed, always-updated API with no infrastructure to run. Teams with GPUs, privacy requirements, or huge volume often favour the open model; teams that want zero ops and the latest capabilities favour the closed one. Capability is close enough that this operational question, not the benchmark, usually decides it.
Want both DeepSeek V4-Pro 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.
Is DeepSeek V4-Pro 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, DeepSeek V4-Pro leans toward open-weight 1.6t moe (~49b active) — deepseek's largest, self-hostable 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, DeepSeek V4-Pro or Muse Spark 1.1?
DeepSeek V4-Pro is open-weight, so self-hosting means no per-token fee (you pay for hardware instead), while Muse Spark 1.1 is API-metered at $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens. For most teams without GPUs, the API model is cheaper to start; at very high volume, self-hosting can win.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 1M vs 1M is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both DeepSeek V4-Pro and Muse Spark 1.1 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you DeepSeek V4-Pro, 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, DeepSeek V4-Pro or Muse Spark 1.1?
Muse Spark 1.1 — released July 9, 2026, about 3 months after DeepSeek V4-Pro.
Specifications and benchmarks reflect publicly reported figures as of June 2026 and may change as providers release updates. Always verify on your own workload.