Roboflow

Muse Spark Open vs Muse Wonder

Muse Wonder and Muse Spark Open score 78.8% vs 69.4% averaged across five Vision Evals tasks (#10 and #25 of 65 models), so Muse Wonder leads overall.

  • Muse Wonder wins all 5 tasks, with its widest lead on reasoning (85.2% vs 63.8%).
  • Muse Spark Open is about 1/6 of the cost: $0.0059 vs $0.034 overall average cost per sample.
  • Muse Spark Open is faster: 7.4s vs 11.7s per sample.

Compare Muse Spark Open vs Muse Wonder 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.

Muse Spark Open vs Muse Wonder on Vision Evals

Score by taskMuse Spark OpenMuse Wonder
Reasoning
63.8
85.2
Identification
82.3
92.7
Object Detection
57.8
65.1
OCR
67.6
74.3
Counting
75.7
76.6

Roboflow Vision Evals. Full breakdown below.

Muse Spark Open vs Muse Wonder Comparison Table

Evals updated October 26, 2026Pricing updated October 27, 2026

PropertyMuse Spark OpenMuse Wonder
OrganizationMetaMeta
Categoryopenclosed
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateOct 2026Oct 2026
Context Window1.0M1.0M
Parameters816B total / 42B activeundisclosed
LicenseCustomProprietary
Commercial useSee license termscommercial use per vendor terms
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.25$4.00
Output $/1M$4.25$20.00
Vision Tasks
CaptioningSupportedDemo
ClassificationSupportedDemo
Object DetectionSupportedDemo
OCRSupportedDemo
Visual Question AnsweringSupportedDemo
Both support 5 more tasks
Model Features
Both support 3 more features
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 5 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
69.4%
78.8%
Avg cost / sample$0.0059$0.034
Avg speed / sample7.37s11.68s
By task
Object Detection (low)
57.8%
±0.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 57.0 to 58.2
$0.0073
65.1%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 64.5 to 66.0
$0.044
Object Detection (high)
60.9%
±0.8, Mean of 3 runs, range 60.3 to 61.9
$0.013
66.0%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 65.2 to 66.5
$0.061
Counting (low)
75.7%
±2.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 78.4
$0.0036
76.6%
±1.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 75.7 to 78.4
$0.024
Counting (high)
75.2%
±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 71.6 to 79.7
$0.0073
79.7%
±1.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.4 to 81.1
$0.043
Identification (low)
82.3%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 81.3 to 84.4
$0.0027
92.7%
±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8
$0.014
Identification (high)
80.2%
±3.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 78.1 to 84.4
$0.0056
90.6%
±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 90.6
$0.023
OCR (low)
67.6%
$0.0061
74.3%
$0.034
by category
Single value
60.0%
Transcription
89.0%
Structured JSON
85.5%
Text localization
29.5%
Single value
67.4%
Transcription
93.2%
Structured JSON
90.5%
Text localization
40.1%
OCR (high)
68.6%
$0.014
76.0%
$0.059
by category
Single value
58.3%
Transcription
91.4%
Structured JSON
88.2%
Text localization
32.2%
Single value
70.9%
Transcription
88.3%
Structured JSON
90.3%
Text localization
45.9%
Reasoning (low)
63.8%
±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.9 to 64.9
$0.0049
85.2%
±0.3, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.8 to 85.4
$0.024
Reasoning (high)
65.1%
±3.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 62.3 to 68.2
$0.012
83.4%
±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.8 to 84.1
$0.047

Muse Spark Open vs Muse Wonder: Overview

Muse Spark Open

Muse Spark Open is an open-weight multimodal model released by Meta on October 15, 2026. Its sparse mixture-of-experts architecture has 816 billion total parameters and activates 42 billion per token. It accepts text, images, audio and video, produces text, and supports a context window of 1,048,576 tokens. Meta provides BF16 and NVFP4 checkpoints for self-hosting, alongside access through hosted inference partners.

The model is designed for coding, tool use and multi-step reasoning over long tasks. Its visual inputs support workflows involving screenshots, documents and other image content. Vision Evals measures its text understanding, counting, identification, reasoning and object detection at Low and High effort. The published weights use the custom Muse Model License, with commercial use subject to its terms and the accompanying usage policy.

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.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Muse Wonder performed better. It scores higher on all five vision tasks and averages 78.8% (#10 of 65) against 69.4% (#25 of 65) for Muse Spark Open. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

No. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Muse Wonder leads with 85.2% against 63.8%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Muse Spark Open is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0059 per sample against $0.034. Muse Spark Open is priced at $1.25 per 1M input tokens and $4.25 per 1M output; Muse Wonder is priced at $4.00 per 1M input tokens and $20.00 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Muse Spark Open is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.4s per inference against 11.7s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.