Roboflow

GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.3

Compare GPT-6 Sol and Muse Spark 1.3 side-by-side.

Compare GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.3 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

OpenAI

GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.3 on Vision Evals

GPT-6 Sol scores higher on 3 of the six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Object Detection, where GPT-6 Sol leads 73.6% to 58.6%.

Overall, GPT-6 Sol averages 80.7% (#10 of 57) against 79.8% (#13 of 57) for Muse Spark 1.3.

GPT-6 Sol is both cheaper ($0.0065 vs $0.0075 per sample) and faster (8.1s vs 23.1s per sample).

GPT-6 SolMuse Spark 1.3

GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.3 Comparison Table

Evals updated September 22, 2026Pricing updated September 22, 2026

PropertyGPT-6 SolMuse Spark 1.3
OrganizationOpenAIMeta
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateSep 2026Sep 2026
Context Window1.1M1.0M
Parametersundisclosed
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.25
Output $/1M$4.25
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
Object DetectionDemo
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
80.7%
79.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0065$0.0075
Avg speed / sample8.15s23.14s
By task
Object Detection (low)
73.6%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.9 to 74.2
$0.011
58.6%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.0 to 59.4
$0.011
Object Detection (high)
75.2%
±0.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.1 to 75.9
$0.022
56.6%
±2.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.5 to 59.3
$0.017
Counting (low)
74.8%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 77.0
$0.0039
74.3%
±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 77.0
$0.0049
Counting (high)
76.1%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 78.4
$0.0071
75.7%
±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 79.7
$0.0094
Identification (low)
91.7%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 93.8
$0.0027
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0036
Identification (high)
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0036
86.5%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5
$0.0063
OCR (low)
91.7%
±0.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.3 to 92.1
$0.0070
91.3%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 91.6
$0.0083
OCR (high)
91.9%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 91.6 to 92.2
$0.019
86.9%
±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.2 to 90.4
$0.015
Data Extraction (low)
80.4%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 80.4 to 80.4
$0.0031
88.7%
±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.6 to 89.7
$0.0031
Data Extraction (high)
82.5%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.4 to 83.5
$0.0045
87.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.6 to 87.6
$0.0044
Reasoning (low)
72.2%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 70.9 to 74.2
$0.0039
73.3%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.2 to 74.2
$0.0064
Reasoning (high)
77.9%
±2.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 80.8
$0.0069
73.1%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.2 to 74.2
$0.012

GPT-6 Sol vs Muse Spark 1.3: 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 1.3

Muse Spark 1.3 is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Meta Superintelligence Labs and the fourth Muse Spark release in five months, arriving on September 2, 2026. It takes text, images, video, and document files as input and returns text, and it operates over a context window of 1,048,576 tokens. Meta trains the model for long-horizon agentic work, so it carries accumulated context and prior tool results forward across many turns, reconciles messy or conflicting inputs, and asks for clarification when a task is underspecified. Visual inputs such as screenshots and video clips feed a reasoning loop that runs against a real execution environment rather than a scripted sequence of steps.

The model exposes graded reasoning effort settings. An xhigh configuration is generally available at launch, while a max reasoning configuration aimed at harder reasoning and agentic problems arrives after further safety testing. Artificial Analysis measures Muse Spark 1.3 (max) at 62 on its Intelligence Index and the xhigh configuration at 61, with agentic tool-use evaluations driving most of the gain over Muse Spark 1.2; max reaches 52% on Tau3-Bench Banking by spending more turns and reasoning tokens than xhigh. Prior Muse Spark versions emit bounding box coordinates, transcriptions, and structured field extractions from images on Roboflow Vision Evals.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, GPT-6 Sol performed slightly better overall. The two split the six vision tasks 3 to 3, but GPT-6 Sol averages 80.7% (#10 of 57) against 79.8% (#13 of 57) for Muse Spark 1.3. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Object Detection benchmark at low effort, GPT-6 Sol leads with 73.6% against 58.6%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

GPT-6 Sol is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0065 per sample against $0.0075. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

GPT-6 Sol is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 8.1s per inference against 23.1s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.