Muse Spark 1.1 vs Reflection Beam 1.0
Meta · US | Reflection AI · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
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. Pick Reflection Beam 1.0 for 501b-parameter sparse moe (about 23b active per token) with weights on hugging face under apache 2.0 or reflection claims 3-4x less inference compute than rival models (vendor claim). Choose Reflection Beam 1.0 if you need self-hosting or data privacy; Muse Spark 1.1 if you want a managed API.
Muse Spark 1.1 (Meta) and Reflection Beam 1.0 (Reflection AI) are two of the models people most often weigh against each other in 2026. 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. Reflection Beam 1.0 is reflection AI's first open-weight model - a 501B Apache 2.0 MoE announced October 5 with weights published October 16, 2026, pitched as a US alternative to Chinese open models. 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
- ▸Cost model: Reflection Beam 1.0 ships open weights you can self-host (hardware cost only, no per-token fee), while Muse Spark 1.1 is API-metered at $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens. Your choice depends on whether you want zero marginal cost at the price of running infrastructure.
- ▸Context window: 1M vs 1M tokens — 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: Reflection Beam 1.0 is the newer model by about 3 months (released October 16, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Muse Spark 1.1 | Reflection Beam 1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta (US) | Reflection AI (US) |
| Released | July 9, 2026 | October 16, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M (~1,573 pages) | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens | Open weight (self-host / free) |
| Open weight? | No — API only | Yes — self-hostable |
| Modalities | text, image, video, code | text, code |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | 54.1% | Not published |
Who wins what
Scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported)
Muse Spark 1.1
Muse Spark 1.1 lists scaled tool use — 88.1 on MCP Atlas, ahead of Opus 4.8 and GPT-5.5 (vendor-reported) among its strengths; Reflection Beam 1.0 does not.
Subagent orchestration — trained to run as a main agent or a subagent that escalates when stuck
Muse Spark 1.1
Reflection Beam 1.0 is comparatively weak here — text-only input; some users report reasoning loops on long agent runs
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; Reflection Beam 1.0 does not.
501B-parameter sparse MoE (about 23B active per token) with weights on Hugging Face under Apache 2.0
Reflection Beam 1.0
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
Reflection claims 3-4x less inference compute than rival models (vendor claim)
Reflection Beam 1.0
Muse Spark 1.1 is comparatively weak here — uS-only public preview behind a waitlist, and every benchmark is vendor-reported with no third-party replication
Fast and cheap to run: Artificial Analysis measured about 385 output tokens/sec and $0.12 per index task
Reflection Beam 1.0
Reflection AI's first open-weight model - a 501B Apache 2.0 MoE announced October 5 with weights published October 16, 2026, pitched as a US alternative to Chinese open models — and its weights are open while Muse Spark 1.1 is API-only.
Lowest cost at scale
Reflection Beam 1.0
Its weights are open, so at volume you pay for your own hardware instead of Muse Spark 1.1's $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens.
Which should you pick?
A cost-sensitive startup shipping high volume
→ Reflection Beam 1.0
At Open weight (self-host / free) 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
→ Reflection Beam 1.0
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
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is 501b-parameter sparse moe (about 23b active per token) with weights on hugging face under apache 2.0
→ Reflection Beam 1.0
That is its strongest area.
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 are real: 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.
Reflection Beam 1.0: where it fits
Reflection AI's first open-weight model - a 501B Apache 2.0 MoE announced October 5 with weights published October 16, 2026, pitched as a US alternative to Chinese open models. Released October 16, 2026 by Reflection AI, it is built for 501B-parameter sparse MoE (about 23B active per token) with weights on Hugging Face under Apache 2.0, reflection claims 3-4x less inference compute than rival models (vendor claim), fast and cheap to run: Artificial Analysis measured about 385 output tokens/sec and $0.12 per index task, and third-party hosts list it from $0.25/$1.00 per million tokens (Nebius, as of Oct 27); Reflection's own API is in free beta.
Its trade-offs: artificial Analysis Intelligence Index of 30, well below DeepSeek V4.1 Flash and GLM-5.3 (45), text-only input; some users report reasoning loops on long agent runs, self-hosting needs about 353 GB of GPU memory even at NVFP4, and kernels are CUDA-only for now, and headline benchmarks come from Reflection's own model card; independent evaluation was limited at launch. As an open-weight model, its running cost is your own hardware rather than a per-token fee.
The bottom line for this matchup
The defining split here is open vs. closed. Reflection Beam 1.0 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 Muse Spark 1.1 and Reflection Beam 1.0 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 Muse Spark 1.1 or Reflection Beam 1.0 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, 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) while Reflection Beam 1.0 leans toward 501b-parameter sparse moe (about 23b active per token) with weights on hugging face under apache 2.0, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.1 or Reflection Beam 1.0?
Reflection Beam 1.0 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 tokens is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Can I use both Muse Spark 1.1 and Reflection Beam 1.0 together?
Yes — a multi-model platform like LumiChats gives you Muse Spark 1.1, Reflection Beam 1.0 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, Muse Spark 1.1 or Reflection Beam 1.0?
Reflection Beam 1.0 — released October 16, 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.