Muse Spark 1.3 64.3/100Rank 6/47

STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD
All comparisons ↗Muse Spark Open leads Muse Spark 1.3 by 4.3 points on StealthMark, 44.1 to 39.8. It leads on 5 of 9 benchmarks, including Latch, and Muse Spark 1.3 on 4, including Foresight. Muse Spark Open scores higher on Ground Truth.
See the difference ↘On every task, result quality and reasoning tokens are each compared with all measured models and weighed equally. Each dot is one model.
BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK
DATASHEET
Muse Spark Open scores higher on StealthMark and runs 12% faster in our speed test. Both take about 1M tokens of context.
Full datasheets, every price and sourceMuse Spark 1.3 ↗Muse Spark Open ↗
Anticipating threats and planning ahead. Collect coins while avoiding ghosts. Ghosts move before the player each turn, and collisions cost a life. 3 levels in sequence, up to 66 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.


Cooperative planning and learning from experience. Coordinate two robots to push numbered cores onto matching sockets. Pressure plates hold doors open; moving either robot uses one turn. 5 levels in sequence, up to 152 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.


Physics, perspective and recursive reflections, tested together. Explore the test ↗


Muse Spark 1.3
The paint state is incorrectly and poorly drawn, despite a recognizable sphere-and-paint setup. The oversized sphere, oversized compact paint bodies, and blurred wall and floor images further limit the result. Isolated reflection cues provide very little support for the required repeated virtual rooms, nested spherical imagery or emitter mapping.
Muse Spark Open
The airborne black blob and deformed paint support the broad contact sequence, although cyan attachment and wheel-directed transport remain partial. The sphere and black blob have substantial framing errors. The dominant limitation is the largely absent mirror system: faint wall circles and isolated highlights provide little evidence of recursive room geometry or curved nested reflections. Oversized compact paint features and diffuse material treatment further limit credit.
| Category | Muse Spark 1.3 | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| State at 600 ms | 6.0/25 | 14.0/25 |
| Camera and placement | 8.5/15 | 6.0/15 |
| Reflections | 5.5/120 | 8.0/120 |
| Materials and scale | 4.0/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Floor-damage reward | 0.0/10 | 0.0/10 |
A spinning metal sphere and paint in a mirrored room test physical reasoning, perspective and consistency across repeated reflections.
Visual construction and creative interpretation.


Muse Spark 1.3
The luminous creature and geometric mirror counterpart communicate self-recognition through a coherent palette and expressive eyes. The transformed reflection is purposeful. Simple oval anatomy, ambiguous reaching-arm construction, shallow spatial staging and limited illumination of nearby surfaces keep the illustration below exceptional execution.
Muse Spark Open
The rounded silhouette and asymmetric expression make an appealing baby elephant, supported by a quiet background and grounding shadow. The protective action remains difficult to read: forefeet cannot be confidently traced into a grip, and seed contact is crowded by fine lines. Controlled simple shapes provide charm, but limited anatomical clarity, shading and surface detail leave the execution uneven.
| Category | Muse Spark 1.3 | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 8.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 5.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Space & placement | 6.5/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 7.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 6.5/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 5.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Materials & effects | 6.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 7.5/10 | 6.5/10 |
Muse Spark 1.3
An imagined creature encounters its reflection. The scene tests original character design, visual self-interpretation and the relationship between a subject and its reflected image.
Muse Spark Open
A small elephant protecting a delicate seed tests expressive anatomy, physical contact and contrasting organic materials.
Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.


Muse Spark 1.3
Dark hair, a restrained smile and overlapping hands suggest Mona Lisa, but replication is weak. The face is markedly elongated, the hands are oval pads with faint finger strokes, and the atmospheric landscape is absent. Soft gradients provide basic volume, while the frontal symmetry, shallow space and sparse clothing detail limit the portrait’s drawing quality.
Muse Spark Open
A recognizable, orderly interpretation with clean major contours, connected body forms and modest facial shading. Wide eyes, frontal symmetry and schematic hands limit likeness and expression. Layered scenery establishes basic depth, but shallow arm overlaps, flat clothing and sparse fine detail keep the execution basic and uneven.
| Category | Muse Spark 1.3 | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 1.0/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 1.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 1.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 1.5/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 1.0/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 1.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Materials & effects | 1.5/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 3.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.
Creativity, perspective and visual beauty.


Muse Spark 1.3
The warm sunset, framing palms and colorful beach accessories create an appealing scene with the requested animals, birds and reflections. Construction remains schematic: the raised hand misses the kite string, and a doglike silhouette hangs above the water without clear support. The sun reflection establishes a focal path, but shadows and materials lack depth. An unexplained horizontal bar crosses the sun.
Muse Spark Open
A coherent sunset beach with readable activities, balanced framing and controlled colour transitions. Small accessories add interest, but schematic anatomy, limited surface detail, weak directional shadows and a geometric reflection constrain its finish. Most shapes and overlaps remain clean.
| Category | Muse Spark 1.3 | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 6.5/10 | 8.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 3.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 5.5/10 | 6.5/10 |
| Light & reflections | 6.5/10 | 5.5/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 5.0/10 | 6.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 3.5/10 | 5.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 3.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 3.5/10 | 8.0/10 |
A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.
Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.


Muse Spark 1.3
This benchmark has not been assessed yet.
Muse Spark Open
This benchmark has not been assessed yet.
A plank, computer mouse and blueberry in a steel room test physical stability, spatial relationships, materials and lighting.
Scene composition and interacting subjects.


Muse Spark 1.3
The raccoon clearly rides on the dog's back, and the dog's paws reach the jet ski controls. Expressive faces and bright colors make the scene appealing. Simplified joints, crowded steering geometry and shallow hull perspective limit construction. The sun has no corresponding water reflection, and the splash shapes convey speed more clearly than convincing displacement.
Muse Spark Open
Expressive faces, distinct accessories and clean color separation make the scene appealing and recognizable. Character detail is stronger than the functional construction: steering contact, limb overlaps and seating remain ambiguous. The readable hull and lively spray establish motion, while limited directional shading and simplified surfaces constrain depth and physical coherence.
| Category | Muse Spark 1.3 | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 8.5/10 | 4.0/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 6.5/10 | 3.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 7.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 5.0/10 | 4.5/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 6.5/10 | 7.0/10 |
| Artistry & character | 5.5/10 | 3.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 6.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 7.5/10 | 5.0/10 |
A jet-ski scene pairs a canine driver with a raccoon passenger. It tests the placement and contact of interacting subjects, along with vehicle construction.
Subject construction and spatial relationships.


Muse Spark 1.3
The pelican and bicycle are immediately recognizable, with an expressive face, bold bill and cheerful composition. Both legs connect to the body and reach pedal-like supports, but articulation, saddle support and wing contact with the handlebar remain unclear. Wheel alignment and layering are coherent. Simple landscape shapes, generic shadows and limited material variation constrain the finish.
Muse Spark Open
A controlled, appealing cartoon with a recognizable pelican, expressive face and clean curved forms. Feather lines, spokes and bill shading provide useful complexity. Aligned wheels and a ground shadow establish placement, but uncertain pedal contacts and obscured mechanical connections weaken support and riding action. Lighting remains loosely coordinated with the sun.
| Category | Muse Spark 1.3 | Muse Spark Open |
|---|---|---|
| Task & likeness | 8.5/10 | 7.5/10 |
| Anatomy & construction | 6.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Space & placement | 7.0/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Light & reflections | 6.0/10 | 5.0/10 |
| Purposeful detail | 7.0/10 | 6.5/10 |
| Artistry & character | 5.5/10 | 5.5/10 |
| Materials & effects | 6.5/10 | 6.0/10 |
| Visual integrity | 7.0/10 | 7.5/10 |
A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.