Claude Fable 5.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3
Wins 6 of 8 areas
Coding · Agents · Reasoning · Images and charts · Math · Long documents
Wins 1 of 8 areas
Following instructions
Claude Fable 5.1 is the stronger all-rounder.Muse Spark 1.3 is cheaper and better at following instructions.
Scores updated · 31 tests both models report · How we compare
Where each one wins
Tests won in each of the eight areas we test. Each piece is one test, so a longer bar means more evidence; grey means the two scored within a point of each other.
- CodingWriting and fixing software50Claude Fable 5.15 of 5 tests
- ReasoningHard problems that need careful thinking40Claude Fable 5.14 of 5 tests · 1 tie
- MathCompetition and research-level math30Claude Fable 5.13 of 3 tests
- AgentsCarrying out multi-step tasks on its own31Claude Fable 5.13 of 4 tests
- Images and chartsUnderstanding pictures, charts and video10Claude Fable 5.11 of 1 test
- Long documentsFinding answers in very long texts10Claude Fable 5.11 of 1 test
- Following instructionsDoing exactly what it is asked01Muse Spark 1.31 of 1 test
- FactsGetting facts right instead of making them up11Even1 each
Images and charts, long documents and following instructions rest on a single test each.
What it costs
Prices per million tokens, roughly 750,000 words. The bars show the cost of a million tokens read plus a million written.
Muse Spark 1.3 costs 91% less for the same work.
The biggest differences
The three tests each model wins by the widest margin. Scores are out of 100.
Where Claude Fable 5.1 pulls ahead
- Extremely hard research-level math problemsFrontierMath Tier 4+41.5points ahead
- Answers hard knowledge questions correctlyAA-Omniscience · Accuracy+23.6points ahead
- Complex command-line tasks across many fieldsTerminal-Bench 4.0+18.7points ahead
Where Muse Spark 1.3 pulls ahead
- Avoids making up answers it doesn't knowAA-Omniscience · Non-hallucination+39.7points ahead
- Follows detailed instructions exactlyLiveBench · Instruction Following+5points ahead
- Customer-service tasks in a simulated bankτ-Bench V3 · Banking+3.3points ahead
Every test, side by side
All 31 tests both models report. The winning score is in its model's colour; marks a score checked independently.
CodingClaude Fable 5.1
- LMArena · WebDevClaude Fable 5.1 by 84 rating points17431659+84 rating
- Terminal-Bench 2.1Claude Fable 5.1 by 7.191.484.3+7.1
- LiveBench · CodingClaude Fable 5.1 by 5.386.481.1+5.3
- SciCodeClaude Fable 5.1 by 4.363.158.8+4.3
- LiveBench · Agentic CodingClaude Fable 5.1 by 266.164.1+2
AgentsClaude Fable 5.1
- Terminal-Bench 4.0Claude Fable 5.1 by 18.75233.3+18.7
- AA IT-Bench SREClaude Fable 5.1 by 16.349.533.2+16.3
- GDPValClaude Fable 5.1 by 3.762.759+3.7
- τ-Bench V3 · BankingMuse Spark 1.3 by 3.347.250.5+3.3
ReasoningClaude Fable 5.1
- Humanity's Last ExamClaude Fable 5.1 by 10.459.148.7+10.4
- CritPtClaude Fable 5.1 by 4.829.724.9+4.8
- SimpleBenchClaude Fable 5.1 by 4.886.681.8+4.8
- LiveBench · ReasoningClaude Fable 5.1 by 291.789.7+2
- GPQA Diamondtie93.793.5tie
FactsEven
- AA-Omniscience · Non-hallucinationMuse Spark 1.3 by 39.727.467.1+39.7
- AA-Omniscience · AccuracyClaude Fable 5.1 by 23.667.243.6+23.6
Images and chartsClaude Fable 5.1
- LMArena · VisionClaude Fable 5.1 by 11 rating points13191308+11 rating
MathClaude Fable 5.1
- FrontierMath Tier 4Claude Fable 5.1 by 41.587.846.3+41.5
- FrontierMath Tiers 1-3 (v2)Claude Fable 5.1 by 16.290.274+16.2
- LiveBench · MathematicsClaude Fable 5.1 by 19796+1
Following instructionsMuse Spark 1.3
- LiveBench · Instruction FollowingMuse Spark 1.3 by 57378+5
Other results9 tests, not counted
Tests outside the eight areas. They are not counted above: several are summary scores built from other tests, or the same test under another name.
- AA-OmniscienceClaude Fable 5.1 by 18.543.525+18.5
- OSWorld 2.0Claude Fable 5.1 by 1177.966.9+11
- DeepSWE 1.1Muse Spark 1.3 by 867.475.4+8
- livebench_languageClaude Fable 5.1 by 6.789.582.8+6.7
- Artificial Analysis Coding IndexClaude Fable 5.1 by 5.881.675.8+5.8
- HiL-Bench (Tools-allowed)Muse Spark 1.3 by 5.461.566.9+5.4
- AA IntelligenceClaude Fable 5.1 by 5.353.448.1+5.3
- AA Agentic IndexClaude Fable 5.1 by 2.35855.7+2.3
- livebench_data_analysistie80.379.6tie
Questions people ask
Which is better, Claude Fable 5.1 or Muse Spark 1.3?
Claude Fable 5.1 wins six of the eight areas we test: coding, agents, reasoning, images and charts, math and long documents. Muse Spark 1.3 wins following instructions, and costs 91% less. They are level on facts.
Which is better for coding?
Claude Fable 5.1. It wins 5 of the 5 coding tests both models report; Muse Spark 1.3 wins none.
Which is cheaper?
Claude Fable 5.1 costs $10.00 per million input tokens and $50.00 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.3 costs $1.25 and $4.25. That makes Muse Spark 1.3 about 91% cheaper for the same work.
How do you compare the two?
We use the 31 benchmark tests both models have published scores on. The verdict counts the 22 tests in the eight capability areas, and a gap under one point (ten on rating-style scales) counts as a tie. The other 9 are listed but not counted, because several are summary scores or repeat a test. Each score is the one shown on the model's own page.