Muse Spark 1.3 vs Muse Wonder 1.0
Meta · US | Meta · US · Updated June 2026
Quick verdict
Both are Meta models. Muse Wonder 1.0 is the newer, generally stronger default; reach for Muse Spark 1.3 when its lower price or a specific cost or latency profile matters more than the latest capabilities.
Muse Spark 1.3 and Muse Wonder 1.0 are both Meta models, so the real question is not which lab to trust but which tier fits your workload and budget. Muse Spark 1.3 is meta's September 2, 2026 agentic-coding model update, cutting tool calls and token usage versus Muse Spark 1.2 while its highest-reasoning mode remains gated for safety review. Muse Wonder 1.0 is meta Superintelligence Labs' October 12, 2026 debut frontier model — distinct from Muse Spark, scoring 52 on the independent Artificial Analysis Index with a 1M-token, four-modality context window. Since both come from the same lab, the comparison below focuses on the tier-and-cost trade-offs that actually separate them.
Key differences at a glance
- ▸Price: Muse Spark 1.3 is about 3.2× cheaper on input ($1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens) — meaningful once you are processing millions of tokens a month.
- ▸Context window: 1M tokens 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: Muse Wonder 1.0 is the newer model by about 40 days (released October 12, 2026), usually meaning fresher training data and capabilities.
Side-by-side specs
| Spec | Muse Spark 1.3 | Muse Wonder 1.0 |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta (US) | Meta (US) |
| Released | September 2, 2026 | October 12, 2026 |
| Context window | 1M tokens (~1,500 pages) | 1M tokens (~1,573 pages) |
| Price (in/out) | $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens | $4/$20 per 1M tokens |
| Open weight? | No — API only | No — API only |
| Modalities | text, image, video | text, image, video, audio |
| SWE-Bench Verified | Not published | Not published |
| MRCR v2 @ 1M | 98.1% | Not published |
Who wins what
Agentic coding with ~20% fewer tool calls and ~25% fewer tokens than Muse Spark 1.2
Muse Spark 1.3
Muse Wonder 1.0 is comparatively weak here — first release in a brand-new model family — no track record yet next to Meta's more established Muse Spark line
DeepSWE v1.1 long-horizon software engineering (75.4)
Muse Spark 1.3
Meta's September 2, 2026 agentic-coding model update, cutting tool calls and token usage versus Muse Spark 1.2 while its highest-reasoning mode remains gated for safety review — and it runs cheaper at $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens.
Near-perfect long-context retrieval (MRCR v2 512K-1M: 98.1)
Muse Spark 1.3
Muse Spark 1.3 lists near-perfect long-context retrieval (MRCR v2 512K-1M: 98.1) among its strengths; Muse Wonder 1.0 does not.
Meta Superintelligence Labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused Muse Spark family
Muse Wonder 1.0
Muse Spark 1.3 is comparatively weak here — strongest 'max' reasoning configuration still gated pending additional safety testing
Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score of 52 (a gated 'Wonder Full' subscription variant scores 56, tied with Claude Sonnet 5.5, behind only Opus 5.5 at 58)
Muse Wonder 1.0
Meta Superintelligence Labs' October 12, 2026 debut frontier model — distinct from Muse Spark, scoring 52 on the independent Artificial Analysis Index with a 1M-token, four-modality context window — and it is the newer of the two.
78.8% on DeepSWE v1.1 long-horizon coding, ahead of both Claude Opus 5.5 (74.2%) and GPT-6 Astra (74.1%)
Muse Wonder 1.0
Muse Wonder 1.0 lists 78.8% on DeepSWE v1.1 long-horizon coding, ahead of both Claude Opus 5.5 (74.2%) and GPT-6 Astra (74.1%) among its strengths; Muse Spark 1.3 does not.
Lowest cost at scale
Muse Spark 1.3
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 1.3
At $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens it undercuts Muse Wonder 1.0, and on millions of tokens that margin decides the monthly bill.
Someone analysing very long documents or codebases
→ Muse Wonder 1.0
Larger 1M tokens window fits more in one prompt.
Anyone whose priority is agentic coding with ~20% fewer tool calls and ~25% fewer tokens than muse spark 1.2
→ Muse Spark 1.3
It is specifically built for that.
Anyone whose priority is meta superintelligence labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused muse spark family
→ Muse Wonder 1.0
That is its strongest area.
Muse Spark 1.3: where it fits
Meta's September 2, 2026 agentic-coding model update, cutting tool calls and token usage versus Muse Spark 1.2 while its highest-reasoning mode remains gated for safety review. Released September 2, 2026 by Meta, it is built for agentic coding with ~20% fewer tool calls and ~25% fewer tokens than Muse Spark 1.2, deepSWE v1.1 long-horizon software engineering (75.4), near-perfect long-context retrieval (MRCR v2 512K-1M: 98.1), and ranks third overall on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (score 61, xhigh variant; the limited-preview max variant scores 62) - behind only Claude Fable 5.1 and Claude Opus 5.
Its trade-offs are real: strongest 'max' reasoning configuration still gated pending additional safety testing, not yet open-weight, despite Meta roadmapping a future Muse Spark weights release, and no official SWE-bench Verified score published. At $1.25 in / $4.25 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
Muse Wonder 1.0: where it fits
Meta Superintelligence Labs' October 12, 2026 debut frontier model — distinct from Muse Spark, scoring 52 on the independent Artificial Analysis Index with a 1M-token, four-modality context window. Released October 12, 2026 by Meta, it is built for meta Superintelligence Labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused Muse Spark family, artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score of 52 (a gated 'Wonder Full' subscription variant scores 56, tied with Claude Sonnet 5.5, behind only Opus 5.5 at 58), 78.8% on DeepSWE v1.1 long-horizon coding, ahead of both Claude Opus 5.5 (74.2%) and GPT-6 Astra (74.1%), and accepts text, image, video, audio, and PDF input against a 1,048,576-token context window.
Its trade-offs: the stronger 'Wonder Full' variant is gated behind $50/$200-per-month Muse Code subscriptions, with no public API or independently verifiable pricing, meta's full safety report had not been published as of launch, first release in a brand-new model family — no track record yet next to Meta's more established Muse Spark line, and benchmark comparisons against Opus 5.5 and GPT-6 Astra are Meta's own self-reported figures. At $4 in / $20 out per million tokens, it sits in the mid price band.
The bottom line for this matchup
Because Muse Spark 1.3 and Muse Wonder 1.0 come from the same lab (Meta), they share the same training philosophy and ecosystem — the decision is purely tier vs. cost. Muse Wonder 1.0 is the more capable, more recent option; the other earns its place only when its price or latency profile fits a specific job better. Most teams should default to Muse Wonder 1.0 and drop down only with a concrete reason.
Want both Muse Spark 1.3 and Muse Wonder 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 1.3 or Muse Wonder 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 1.3 leans toward agentic coding with ~20% fewer tool calls and ~25% fewer tokens than muse spark 1.2 while Muse Wonder 1.0 leans toward meta superintelligence labs' first frontier-class reasoning model — a new line distinct from the agentic-coding-focused muse spark family, and that positioning usually predicts which feels better on your codebase.
Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.3 or Muse Wonder 1.0?
Muse Spark 1.3 is cheaper — $1.25/$4.25 per 1M tokens vs $4/$20 per 1M tokens, roughly 3.2× apart on input.
Which has the bigger context window?
Effectively neither — 1M tokens vs 1M tokens is a difference of a few percent. Remember advertised ≠ usable: recall typically degrades before the ceiling.
Should I upgrade from Muse Spark 1.3 to Muse Wonder 1.0?
Since both are Meta models, the newer one (Muse Wonder 1.0) is usually the better default unless you need a specific cost or latency profile from the other.
Which is newer, Muse Spark 1.3 or Muse Wonder 1.0?
Muse Wonder 1.0 — released October 12, 2026, about 40 days after Muse Spark 1.3.
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.