Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.2
Compare Grok 4.6 and Muse Spark 1.2 side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Image Captioning, Open Prompt, Classification, OCR, and Object Detection.
Compare Grok 4.6 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.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.2 on Vision Evals
Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher on all five Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Object Detection, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 59.0% to 23.8%.
Overall, Grok 4.6 averages 59.1% (#34 of 61) against 73.8% (#15 of 61) for Muse Spark 1.2.
Muse Spark 1.2 is both cheaper ($0.0083 vs $0.011 per sample) and faster (11.5s vs 19.3s per sample).
Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.2 Comparison Table
Evals updated October 8, 2026Pricing updated October 9, 2026
| Property | Grok 4.6 | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | SpaceXAI | Meta |
| Category | closed | closed |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Aug 2026 | Aug 2026 |
| Context Window | 500K | 1.0M |
| Parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Proprietary | Proprietary |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $2.00 | $1.25 |
| Output $/1M | $6.00 | $4.25 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Classification | Demo | Demo |
| Document Question Answering | Supported | Supported |
| Image Tagging | Supported | Supported |
| Multi-Label Classification | Supported | Supported |
| Object Detection | Demo | Demo |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | Supported | Supported |
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | Supported | Supported |
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | Supported | Supported |
| Multimodal Vision | Supported | Supported |
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 59.1% | 73.8% |
| Avg cost / sample | $0.011 | $0.0083 |
| Avg speed / sample | 19.32s | 11.51s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 23.8% ±2.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 20.2 to 25.9 | 59.0% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.1 to 60.2 |
| Object Detection (high) | 24.0% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 23.1 to 25.1 | 60.5% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.2 to 60.7 |
| Counting (low) | 65.8% ±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.2 to 70.3 | 76.6% ±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.3 to 79.7 |
| Counting (high) | 56.8% ±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 55.4 to 58.1 | 75.2% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 77.0 |
| Identification (low) | 84.4% ±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 87.5 | 89.6% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6 |
| Identification (high) | 85.4% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5 | 87.5% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 87.5 |
| OCR (low) | 60.6% | 68.7% |
| by category |
|
|
| OCR (high) | 61.2% | 68.6% |
| by category |
|
|
| Reasoning (low) | 61.1% ±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.6 to 62.3 | 75.1% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 74.8 to 75.5 |
| Reasoning (high) | 63.8% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.3 to 66.2 | 75.7% ±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 76.2 |
Grok 4.6 vs Muse Spark 1.2: Overview
Grok 4.6 is a proprietary reasoning model from xAI aimed at long-running agentic workflows, coding, and knowledge work. It accepts text and image input and returns text, with a 500,000 token context window and a knowledge cutoff of February 1, 2026. The model exposes an adjustable reasoning budget with low, medium, high, and xhigh settings, where high is the default, and it supports function calling, structured outputs, web and X search, and code execution as documented tool behaviors. Its visual capability covers interpreting images supplied alongside text prompts, which places it in the visual question answering and document understanding family, and it can also return object detection boxes as text coordinates when prompted.
xAI characterizes Grok 4.6 as the result of an extended post-training run over the Grok 4.5 lineage rather than a new pretrained base. The described recipe combines curated model-generated reasoning and technical data, engineering data, a revised optimizer, regenerated supervised fine-tuning trajectories, and reinforcement learning across agent environments spanning knowledge work, coding, kernel optimization, web development, and computer-aided design. Parameter count and architecture specifics are not disclosed. Independent measurement from Artificial Analysis places the model at 61 on its Intelligence Index, five points above Grok 4.5.
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.