Compare / Muse Spark 1.3 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Muse Spark 1.3 vs MiniMax M3.1 Flash
Which is cheaper, which is more capable, and which does better at each kind of work, from 64 results on 4 sources that measured both models.
MetaMuse Spark 1.3
MiniMaxMiniMax M3.1 Flash
Muse Spark 1.3 wins 3012 too close to callMiniMax M3.1 Flash wins 22
Of the 64 results both models have, the better value on each. Results whose reported ranges overlap are too close to call.
Results as of 20 October 2026 (catalogue release 2026-10-20-96eb40c3ec63). See also Meta vs MiniMax, every model from both labs.
Muse Spark 1.3 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash? The short answer
Pick Muse Spark 1.3 if quality matters most: it scores higher (Spring Prompt overall 62 against 47). Pick MiniMax M3.1 Flash if cost matters more: it costs 7.6 times less per token. Muse Spark 1.3 is also faster.
- Spring Prompt overall: Muse Spark 1.3 62, MiniMax M3.1 Flash 47 (out of 100; how the score works).
- MiniMax M3.1 Flash is cheaper: $0.26 against $2.00 per million tokens, 7.6 times less.
- Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index: 48.1 against 42.4.
- Muse Spark 1.3 writes faster: 254 tokens a second against 159.
- MiniMax M3.1 Flash is newer: released 19 Oct 2026, against 2 Sep 2026 for Muse Spark 1.3.
- On our own benchmarks, on the results both models have: MiniMax M3.1 Flash does better for product listings, decks from an analysis and marketing planning.
- On third-party benchmarks, on the results both models have: Muse Spark 1.3 does better for agents and tool use and reasoning and knowledge.
Head to head
62
Spring Prompt overall
47
48.1
Intelligence Index
42.4
$2.00
Price per million tokens, blendedlower is better
$0.26
254
Output speed, tokens a second
159
1,048,576
Context window, tokens
1,048,576
Every fact side by side
| Muse Spark 1.3 | MiniMax M3.1 Flash | |
|---|---|---|
| Price per million tokens | $1.25 in · $4.25 out | $0.15 in · $0.60 out |
| Blended (3 in : 1 out) | $2.00 | $0.26 |
| Cheapest host, blended | – | – |
| Cached input, per million | $0.15 cached input | $0.015 cached input |
| Intelligence Index | 48.1 | 42.4 |
| Spring Prompt overall | 62 | 47 |
| Output speed, tokens a second | 254 | 159 |
| Context window | 1,048,576 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens |
| Released | 2 Sep 2026 | 19 Oct 2026 (newer) |
| Weights | Closed | Closed |
| Developer based in | the US | China |
Prices are the developer's list price where we have read it, otherwise the typical host on OpenRouter; see every model's price. Intelligence and speed from Artificial Analysis.
Which is better for what
Each model's rank among the models on sale today, for each kind of work, from our own benchmarks and licensed sources. Further right is better; the better rank is in green.
Product listingsTurning a sparse product feed and photos into listings that can go live
12 of 24
7 of 24
Decks from an analysisTurning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is
16 of 24
14 of 24
User surveysPlanning a user survey and reading its results without being misled
not measured
13 of 13
Marketing planningPlanning a year of ad spend without overspending
16 of 24
12 of 24
Agents and tool useMulti-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls
11 of 168
32 of 168
Professional workReal tasks from banking, consulting and law, business documents and freelance projects
8 of 51
not measured
Reasoning and knowledgeHard questions across science, maths and general knowledge
10 of 202
18 of 202
WritingWhat people prefer in blind comparisons, and judged writing quality
7 of 189
not measured
Sticking to the factsSummarising without inventing things, and factual answers
12 of 153
not measured
Speed under pressureGood decisions against a real clock (fast chess)
25 of 27
not measured
From our research
- AI Checkpoint: Argon matches Opus, until it sells 16 Oct 2026
- Muse Wonder review: good analysis, work that still needs checking 13 Oct 2026
- Mistral Large 4 Is Fast, Cheap and Europe's Best Model. On Business Work, It Still Makes Things Up. 7 Oct 2026
- MiniMax M3.1 Flash first look: careful with product data, unreliable on long jobs 19 Oct 2026
Every shared result
Each model's best result on every measure both have, grouped by benchmark, with the setting that produced it. Under each measure, every model that benchmark has measured is a grey tick, best to the right, so you can see where the two sit in the field. The headline measures of each benchmark come first; the rest are under "Show all". Green marks the better value; where a source reports ranges that overlap, neither is marked.
| Measure | Muse Spark 1.3 | MiniMax M3.1 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CatalogBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Cost per productUS dollars, lower is better 15 · 1 of 24 measured | $0.0164 | $0 |
| Reliably publish-ready% of products, higher is better 10 · 9 of 24 measured | 48.2% | 50.0% |
| Reliably publish-ready · sales brief% of products, higher is better 12 · 6 of 24 measured | 10.7% | 37.5% |
| DeckBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Cost per deckUS dollars, lower is better 10 · 1 of 24 measured | $0.0463 | $0 |
| Deck ratingrating, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other deck was; the win rate counts wins against whichever decks a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 16 · 14 of 24 measured | 888 | 1,090 |
| Accurate decks% of tasks, higher is better 17 · 9 of 24 measured | 16.7% | 50.0% |
| ROASBench measured by Spring Prompt · 3 results | ||
| Overall scorescore out of 100, higher is better 16 · 12 of 24 measured | 34.1 | 40.3 |
| Audience scorescore out of 100, higher is better 16 · 12 of 24 measured | 51.6 | 60.8 |
| Business scorescore out of 100, higher is better 16 · 10 of 24 measured | 25.8 | 38.9 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 3 results | ||
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Indexindex score, higher is better 10 · 21 of 249 measured | 48.1max reasoning | 42.4 |
| Humanity's Last Exam% of questions, higher is better 12 · 14 of 248 measured | 48.7%max reasoning | 48.0% |
| Terminal-Bench 4.0% of tasks, higher is better 17 · 22 of 118 measured | 33.3%max reasoning | 25.8% |
Show all 64 results (52 more)
| Measure | Muse Spark 1.3 | MiniMax M3.1 Flash |
|---|---|---|
| CatalogBench measured by Spring Prompt · 28 results | ||
| Channel compliance% of products, higher is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| Channel rules broken% of products, lower is better 1 · 12 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.6% |
| Channel rules broken · sales brief% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Claims to check% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Claims to check · sales brief% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Conflicts caught% of conflicts, higher is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| Content quality% of checks, higher is better 8 · 17 of 24 measured | 97.7% | 95.8% |
| Content quality · sales brief% of checks, higher is better 6 · 17 of 24 measured | 98.2% | 96.0% |
| Decision accuracy% of decisions, higher is better 7 · 16 of 24 measured | 97.6% | 95.6% |
| Failed outputs% of products, lower is better 1 · 22 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 1.8% |
| Failed outputs · sales brief% of products, lower is better 1 · 22 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 1.8% |
| Field accuracy% of missing fields, higher is better 14 · 19 of 24 measured | 92.9% | 92.0% |
| Invented values% of filled values, lower is better 5 · 22 of 24 measured | 0.7% | 3.8% |
| Missing UK information% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Missing UK information · sales brief% of products, lower is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Not findable% of products, lower is better 14 · 16 of 24 measured | 6.0% | 7.1% |
| Not findable · sales brief% of products, lower is better 14 · 12 of 24 measured | 5.4% | 4.2% |
| Publish-ready listings% of products, higher is better 9 · 11 of 24 measured | 65.5% | 63.1% |
| Publish-ready listings · sales brief% of products, higher is better 10 · 7 of 24 measured | 34.5% | 57.1% |
| Time per productseconds, lower is better 21 · 19 of 24 measured | 47.5 | 32.0 |
| Unsupported claimsclaims per product, lower is better 8 · 6 of 24 measured | 0.44 | 0.39 |
| Unsupported claims% of products, lower is better 9 · 5 of 24 measured | 14.9% | 7.7% |
| Unsupported claims · sales briefclaims per product, lower is better 10 · 6 of 24 measured | 1.50 | 0.60 |
| Unsupported claims · sales brief% of products, lower is better 10 · 5 of 24 measured | 57.7% | 16.1% |
| Wrong attributes% of products, lower is better 10 · 20 of 24 measured | 16.7% | 22.6% |
| Wrong attributes · sales brief% of products, lower is better 4 · 20 of 24 measured | 14.3% | 21.4% |
| Wrong category or variant% of products, lower is better 20 · 20 of 24 measured | 4.2% | 4.2% |
| Wrong category or variant · sales brief% of products, lower is better 19 · 21 of 24 measured | 3.6% | 4.8% |
| DeckBench measured by Spring Prompt · 14 results | ||
| Caveat dropped% of tasks, lower is better 12 · 24 of 24 measured | 16.7% | 33.3% |
| Clean layout% of tasks, higher is better 23 · 23 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Design quality% of the maximum, higher is better 17 · 21 of 24 measured | 56.1% | 46.2% |
| Draft figure quoted% of tasks, lower is better 9 · 12 of 24 measured | 16.7% | 33.3% |
| Findings missing% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 24 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 50.0% |
| Head-to-head win rate% of comparisons, higher is betterThe rating weighs each win by how strong the other deck was; the win rate counts wins against whichever decks a model happened to meet, so the two can disagree. 17 · 15 of 24 measured | 43.0% | 48.6% |
| Layout defects% of tasks, lower is better 23 · 23 of 24 measured | 100.0% | 100.0% |
| Misleading metric used% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 24 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 33.3% |
| Presentable decks% of tasks, higher is better 12 · 12 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 0.0% |
| Recommendation late or wrong% of tasks, lower is better 20 · 13 of 24 measured | 66.7% | 33.3% |
| Slides needing work% of tasks, lower is better 11 · 21 of 24 measured | 50.0% | 83.3% |
| Time per deckseconds, lower is better 11 · 20 of 24 measured | 89.4 | 330 |
| Unsupported claims% of tasks, lower is better 11 · 21 of 24 measured | 16.7% | 50.0% |
| Unsupported numbers% of tasks, lower is better 1 · 24 of 24 measured | 0.0% | 50.0% |
| ROASBench measured by Spring Prompt · 6 results | ||
| Consistency scorescore out of 100, higher is better 12 · 17 of 24 measured | 26.7 | 17.3 |
| Contribution profitsimulated US dollars, higher is better 15 · 5 of 24 measured | $337,251 | $693,379 |
| Cost of a runUS dollars, lower is better 12 · 1 of 24 measured | $0.18 | $0 |
| Months over budgetmonths of 12, lower is better 1 · 1 of 24 measured | 0 | 0 |
| Planning scorescore out of 100, higher is better 9 · 21 of 24 measured | 54.8 | 54.2 |
| Return on ad spendprofit per $1 spent, higher is better 15 · 9 of 24 measured | $0.29 | $0.52 |
| Artificial Analysis reported by Artificial Analysis · 4 results | ||
| Long-context reasoning (AA-LCR)% of questions, higher is better 15 · 45 of 239 measured | 83.0%max reasoning | 79.7% |
| Output speedtokens per second, higher is better 9 · 21 of 78 measured | 254xhigh reasoning | 159 |
| SciCode% of problems, higher is better 9 · 36 of 119 measured | 59.7%xhigh reasoning | 53.4% |
| Time to first answer tokenseconds, lower is better 66 · 51 of 78 measured | 29.6xhigh reasoning | 13.3 |
Compare them with other models
- Meta vs MiniMaxEvery model from both labs, best against best
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs DeepSeek-V4.1-Flash-1017Cheapest with similar intelligence
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Claude Opus 5.5Most intelligent available today
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Claude Sonnet 5.5Just above overall
- Muse Spark 1.3 vs Gemini 3.8 FlashJust below overall
- MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Claude Haiku 5.5Cheapest with similar intelligence
- MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashFastest with similar intelligence
- MiniMax M3.1 Flash vs Claude Opus 5.5Most intelligent available today
Quick answers
Is Muse Spark 1.3 better than MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
Pick Muse Spark 1.3 if quality matters most: it scores higher (Spring Prompt overall 62 against 47). Pick MiniMax M3.1 Flash if cost matters more: it costs 7.6 times less per token. Muse Spark 1.3 is also faster.
Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.3 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash is cheaper: $0.26 against $2.00 per million tokens, 7.6 times less.
Which is faster, Muse Spark 1.3 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
Muse Spark 1.3 writes about 254 tokens a second on its usual API, against 159 for MiniMax M3.1 Flash (Artificial Analysis).
Which is better for product listings, Muse Spark 1.3 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash ranks 7 of 24 models on sale for turning a sparse product feed and photos into listings that can go live, against 12 for Muse Spark 1.3.
Which is better for decks from an analysis, Muse Spark 1.3 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash ranks 14 of 24 models on sale for turning a finished analysis into a deck you could present as it is, against 16 for Muse Spark 1.3.
Which is better for marketing planning, Muse Spark 1.3 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
MiniMax M3.1 Flash ranks 12 of 24 models on sale for planning a year of ad spend without overspending, against 16 for Muse Spark 1.3.
Which is better for agents and tool use, Muse Spark 1.3 or MiniMax M3.1 Flash?
Muse Spark 1.3 ranks 11 of 168 models on sale for multi-step tasks with tools: support desks, coding agents, function calls, against 32 for MiniMax M3.1 Flash.
Run Muse Spark 1.3 and MiniMax M3.1 Flash on your own prompt
Benchmarks aren't your data. Try both side by side in the playground, with the cost of every answer.