GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Spark 1.1
Compare GPT-5.4 Mini and Muse Spark 1.1 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, Object Detection, Classification, Image Captioning, and OCR.
Compare GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Spark 1.1 live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Detect and compare bounding boxes across models on the same image.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Spark 1.1 on Vision Evals
Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 58.2% to 16.1%.
Overall, GPT-5.4 Mini averages 63.5% (#23 of 25) against 79.2% (#6 of 25) for Muse Spark 1.1.
GPT-5.4 Mini is both cheaper ($0.0030 vs $0.0069 per sample) and faster (5.3s vs 11.4s per sample).
GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Spark 1.1 Comparison Table
Evals updated August 6, 2026Pricing updated August 11, 2026
| Property | GPT-5.4 Mini | Muse Spark 1.1 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | OpenAI | Meta |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Mar 2026 | Jul 2026 |
| Context Window | 400K | 1.0M |
| Parameters | ||
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $0.750 | $1.25 |
| Output $/1M | $4.50 | $4.25 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 63.5% | 79.2% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0030 | $0.0069 |
| Avg speed / sample | 5.35s | 11.40s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection | 16.1% $0.0044 | 58.2% $0.010 |
| Counting | 60.8% $0.0019 | 75.7% $0.0043 |
| Identification | 78.1% $0.0013 | 87.5% $0.0032 |
| OCR | 88.1% $0.0042 | 92.5% $0.0063 |
| Data Extraction | 82.5% $0.0014 | 86.6% $0.0031 |
| Reasoning (low) | 55.6% $0.0023 | 74.8% $0.0065 |
| Reasoning (high) | 62.9% $0.0081 | 76.2% $0.013 |
GPT-5.4 Mini vs Muse Spark 1.1: Overview
GPT-5.4 mini is a fast, cost-efficient model developed by OpenAI and released on March 17, 2026, optimized for high-throughput workloads and subagent orchestration. It supports text and image inputs within a 400,000-token context window, making it ideal for processing extensive visual datasets and large codebases in a single request. Designed for low-latency production environments, the model integrates with key API features including function calling, web search, and tool-based computer use, allowing it to assist in automated workflows that require navigating digital interfaces.
Compared to the previous GPT-5 mini, this version runs more than twice as fast while approaching the performance levels of the flagship GPT-5.4 on reasoning and coding benchmarks. While the larger GPT-5.4 introduces native, state-of-the-art computer-use capabilities, GPT-5.4 mini provides a scalable alternative for interpreting screenshots and reasoning over dense UI layouts. For vision tasks on Playground, it excels at extracting structured information from visual documents and assisting in agentic tasks that involve real-time interpretation of software interfaces alongside text.
Muse Spark 1.1 is a natively multimodal reasoning model from Meta Superintelligence Labs, released on July 9, 2026, as a significant upgrade to the original Muse Spark. The model accepts text, image, video, PDF, and audio as input and produces text output. It operates with a 1-million-token context window (1,048,576 tokens per the Meta Model API documentation) and is designed specifically for agentic tasks that require planning, tool use, computer use, and multi-agent orchestration. The model runs in a "Thinking" mode, where adjustable reasoning effort is applied before generating a response. It can function both as a main agent gathering context, forming plans, and delegating to parallel subagents and as a subagent that adheres to assigned tasks and escalates when needed. It is trained to decide autonomously when to write automation scripts versus interact directly with a user interface.
Muse Spark 1.1 supports a range of multimodal capabilities including visual perception, image and video captioning, visual-to-code generation, and document analysis. The model was evaluated under Meta's Advanced AI Scaling Framework across frontier risk categories including chemical and biological threats, cybersecurity, and loss-of-control scenarios. Parameter count, architecture details, and training data composition are not publicly disclosed. The model is proprietary and closed-weight, accessible to consumers through the Meta AI app and to developers via the Meta Model API, which launched in public preview alongside this release.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Muse Spark 1.1 performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 79.2% (#6 of 25) against 63.5% (#23 of 25) for GPT-5.4 Mini. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.
No. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark, Muse Spark 1.1 leads with 58.2% against 16.1%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
GPT-5.4 Mini is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0030 per sample against $0.0069. GPT-5.4 Mini is priced at $0.75 per 1M input tokens and $4.50 per 1M output; Muse Spark 1.1 is priced at $1.25 per 1M input tokens and $4.25 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
GPT-5.4 Mini is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 5.3s per inference against 11.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for open prompts and object detection in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.