Roboflow

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder and Muse Spark 1.1 score 78.8% vs 74.4% averaged across five Vision Evals tasks (#10 and #16 of 65 models), so Muse Wonder leads overall.

  • Muse Wonder wins 4 of the 5 tasks, with its widest lead on reasoning (85.2% vs 74.2%).
  • Muse Spark 1.1 is about a quarter of the cost: $0.0075 vs $0.034 overall average cost per sample.
  • Muse Spark 1.1 is faster: 7.2s vs 11.7s per sample.

Compare Muse Spark 1.1 vs Muse Wonder 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
MetaMuse Spark 1.1
Run to compare this model.
MetaMuse Wonder
Run to compare this model.

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Muse Wonder on Vision Evals

Score by taskMuse Spark 1.1Muse Wonder
Reasoning
74.2
85.2
OCR
68.8
74.3
Object Detection
60.6
65.1
Identification
91.7
92.7
Counting
76.6
76.6

Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Muse Wonder Comparison Table

Evals updated October 26, 2026Pricing updated November 5, 2026

PropertyMuse Spark 1.1Muse Wonder
OrganizationMetaMeta
Categoryclosedclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Oct 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
ParametersUnknownundisclosed
LicenseProprietaryProprietary
Commercial usecommercial use per vendor termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.25$4.00
Output $/1M$4.25$20.00
Vision Tasks
Both support 10 more tasks
Model Features
Both support 3 more features
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
74.4%
78.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0075$0.034
Avg speed / sample7.15s11.68s
By task
Object Detection (low)
60.6%
±1.9, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.4 to 62.1
$0.0097
65.1%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.5 to 66.0
$0.044
Object Detection (high)
60.0%
±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 59.6 to 60.7
$0.015
66.0%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.5
$0.061
Counting (low)
76.6%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 78.4
$0.0042
76.6%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 78.4
$0.024
Counting (high)
76.1%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 77.0
$0.0079
79.7%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.043
Identification (low)
91.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.0033
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.014
Identification (high)
89.6%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.5 to 90.6
$0.0065
90.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6
$0.023
OCR (low)
68.8%
$0.0076
74.3%
$0.034
by category
Single value
60.4%
Transcription
90.1%
Structured JSON
86.1%
Text localization
33.9%
Single value
67.4%
Transcription
93.2%
Structured JSON
90.5%
Text localization
40.1%
OCR (high)
67.5%
$0.015
76.0%
$0.059
by category
Single value
60.4%
Transcription
81.6%
Structured JSON
85.7%
Text localization
31.4%
Single value
70.9%
Transcription
88.3%
Structured JSON
90.3%
Text localization
45.9%
Reasoning (low)
74.2%
±1.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.2 to 75.5
$0.0061
85.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.8 to 85.4
$0.024
Reasoning (high)
76.6%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.5 to 78.2
$0.013
83.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.1
$0.047

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Muse Wonder: Overview

Muse Spark 1.1

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.

Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Meta, released on October 12, 2026 as the first step past the Muse Spark line on Meta's scaling ladder. It launched together with Muse Wonder Full, a larger configuration that is available only through Muse Code subscription plans, while Muse Wonder itself is served through the Meta Model API under the identifier muse-wonder-1.0. The model accepts text, images, video, audio, and PDF documents as input and returns text, with a context window of 1,048,576 tokens and graded reasoning effort settings. Meta trained both models at its Prometheus data center on larger base models than Muse Spark 1.3, and attributes their gains on unfamiliar tasks to post-training that transfers more effectively from a stronger base.

Meta positions Muse Wonder for long-running personal and professional agents: it plans multi-step work, delegates to sub-agents, calls tools in parallel, recovers from errors, and operates browsers and desktop or mobile applications. Two training objectives shape this behaviour. Active Memory carries goals, constraints, and earlier decisions across conversations and retrieves the details relevant to the current step, and Active Focus keeps the model trying alternative approaches when a task gets difficult while asking for clarification before important actions. Visual inputs such as screenshots, charts, and video feed the same reasoning loop, and the model emits bounding box coordinates for grounding queries. Meta's model card lists visual and spatial reasoning, especially 3D tasks, as a known limitation and recommends validating performance for applications that depend on precise spatial understanding.