Gemma 4 12B vs Muse Spark 1.2
Compare Gemma 4 12B and Muse Spark 1.2 side-by-side.
Compare Gemma 4 12B vs Muse Spark 1.2 live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.
Models in this comparison
Gemma 4 12B vs Muse Spark 1.2 Comparison Table
Evals updated September 3, 2026Pricing updated September 3, 2026
| Property | Gemma 4 12B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Meta | |
| Category | open | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Jun 2026 | Aug 2026 |
| Context Window | — | 1.0M |
| Parameters | 12B | |
| License | Apache 2.0 | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.25 | |
| Output $/1M | $4.25 | |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| object-detection | Demo | |
| Model Features | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | Not evaluated | 80.5% |
| Avg cost / sample | – | $0.0072 |
| Avg speed / sample | – | 7.81s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | – | 59.0% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.1 to 60.2 |
| Object Detection (high) | – | 60.5% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.2 to 60.7 |
| Counting (low) | – | 76.6% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.3 to 79.7 |
| Counting (high) | – | 75.2% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 77.0 |
| Identification (low) | – | 89.6% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6 |
| Identification (high) | – | 87.5% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 87.5 |
| OCR (low) | – | 93.6% ±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 92.9 to 94.1 |
| OCR (high) | – | 92.9% ±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.9 to 93.6 |
| Data Extraction (low) | – | 89.0% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.6 to 89.7 |
| Data Extraction (high) | – | 88.3% ±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.6 to 89.7 |
| Reasoning (low) | – | 75.1% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.8 to 75.5 |
| Reasoning (high) | – | 75.7% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 76.2 |
Gemma 4 12B vs Muse Spark 1.2: Overview
Gemma 4 12B is an open-weight multimodal model from Google in the Gemma 4 family. It is intended for text and image understanding tasks such as visual question answering, OCR, captioning, and document understanding, with a smaller parameter footprint than the larger Gemma 4 variants.
This entry is connected to Roboflow Playground vision evals for comparison. No runnable Playground workflow is configured yet, so the model page is used for discovery and benchmark context rather than direct hosted inference.
Muse Spark 1.2 is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Meta Superintelligence Labs, released as a coding-focused update to Muse Spark 1.1. It accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents and returns text, with a context window of roughly one million tokens that allows whole repositories, long documents, and extended agent trajectories to be held in a single request. The model thinks before answering, and the amount of reasoning effort it spends is configurable per request. Alongside its visual and document understanding, it supports structured output and parallel function calling, and it is designed to operate either as a planning agent that delegates work or as a subagent executing tasks in parallel.
Training for version 1.2 scaled up compute on coding tasks and widened the diversity of training environments, concentrating on long-horizon work such as whole-repository generation, large end-to-end projects, and automated research. Part of the training data was self-generated, with Muse Spark 1.1 producing coding environments and instruction-following templates and grading candidate solutions against them. The model was co-trained with the Muse Code terminal agent, incorporating rejection-sampled harness trajectories and that toolset. Meta reports 82.9 percent on Terminal-Bench 2.1, an improvement of 6.7 points over Muse Spark 1.1. Multimodal use cases documented for the family include visual-to-code generation and detailed image and video captioning.
Frequently Asked Questions
Gemma 4 12B has not yet been evaluated on Roboflow's current Vision Evals, so this comparison shows specs, licensing, and pricing rather than benchmark scores.
Gemma 4 12B is released under Apache 2.0, while Muse Spark 1.2 uses Proprietary. Licensing often matters more than raw accuracy for commercial deployments, so check the terms against how you plan to ship.