Roboflow

GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.2

Compare GPT-6 Sol and Muse Spark 1.2 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, OCR, Classification, Object Detection, and Open Prompt.

Compare GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.2 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.

Open Object Detection in the full playground
OpenAIGPT-6 Sol
Run to compare this model.
MetaMuse Spark 1.2
Run to compare this model.

Models in this comparison

OpenAI

GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.2 on Vision Evals

GPT-6 Sol scores higher on 2 of the five Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where GPT-6 Sol leads 74.7% to 59.0%.

Overall, GPT-6 Sol averages 76.9% (#12 of 63) against 73.8% (#17 of 63) for Muse Spark 1.2.

GPT-6 Sol is both cheaper ($0.0074 vs $0.0083 per sample) and faster (10.2s vs 11.5s per sample).

GPT-6 SolMuse Spark 1.2

GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.2 Comparison Table

Evals updated October 13, 2026Pricing updated October 16, 2026

PropertyGPT-6 SolMuse Spark 1.2
OrganizationOpenAIMeta
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Aug 2026
Context Window1.1M1.0M
ParametersundisclosedUnknown
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$2.00$1.25
Output $/1M$10.00$4.25
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemoDemo
Chart Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
ClassificationDemoDemo
Document Question AnsweringSupportedSupported
Image TaggingSupportedSupported
Multi-Label ClassificationSupportedSupported
Object DetectionDemoDemo
OCRDemoDemo
Vision LanguageSupportedSupported
Visual Question AnsweringDemoDemo
Promptable Concept SegmentationDemoNot listed
Model Features
Foundation VisionSupportedSupported
LLMs with Vision CapabilitiesSupportedSupported
Multimodal VisionSupportedSupported
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
76.9%
73.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0074$0.0083
Avg speed / sample10.20s11.51s
By task
Object Detection (low)
74.7%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.1 to 75.5
$0.011
59.0%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.1 to 60.2
$0.0096
Object Detection (high)
76.4%
±1.2, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.0 to 77.4
$0.022
60.5%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.2 to 60.7
$0.014
Counting (low)
76.6%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.3 to 78.4
$0.0039
76.6%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.3 to 79.7
$0.0050
Counting (high)
77.5%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 78.4
$0.0070
75.2%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 77.0
$0.0082
Identification (low)
93.8%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 93.8 to 93.8
$0.0027
89.6%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0038
Identification (high)
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0036
87.5%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 87.5
$0.0062
OCR (low)
66.7%
$0.0077
68.7%
$0.0086
by category
Single value
45.6%
Transcription
88.3%
Structured JSON
83.4%
Text localization
65.7%
Single value
60.4%
Transcription
89.3%
Structured JSON
87.0%
Text localization
31.5%
OCR (high)
68.8%
$0.018
68.6%
$0.014
by category
Single value
47.4%
Transcription
91.0%
Structured JSON
85.3%
Text localization
68.7%
Single value
61.7%
Transcription
85.1%
Structured JSON
86.7%
Text localization
30.7%
Reasoning (low)
72.6%
±3.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 69.5 to 76.8
$0.0037
75.1%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.8 to 75.5
$0.0073
Reasoning (high)
77.7%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 76.8 to 78.8
$0.0061
75.7%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 76.2
$0.012

GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.2: Overview

GPT-6 Sol

GPT-6 Sol is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from OpenAI, released on September 22, 2026 alongside GPT-6 Luna as an efficiency-oriented tier of the GPT-6 family that began with GPT-6 Astra. OpenAI states that Sol and Luna are trained with methods similar to those used for Astra, carrying the same work on professional tasks, factuality, coding, computer use, and alignment into models that run faster. Sol accepts text and image input and returns text output, and OpenAI documents a context window of roughly one million tokens together with a knowledge cutoff of April 20, 2026.

The model targets complex coding and agentic workflows and exposes a configurable reasoning effort setting with levels of none, low, medium, high, xhigh, and max, which trades latency and token consumption against answer quality. OpenAI reports results including 33.2% on AutomationBench at xhigh effort and 56.4% on Agents' Last Exam at max effort, while its reported DeepSWE and OSWorld 2.0 figures of 68.8% and 64.4% fall below those of the earlier GPT-5.6 Sol. Its vision behavior covers image understanding tasks such as visual question answering, captioning, document and chart interpretation, and text recognition.

Muse Spark 1.2

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.