Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Claude Opus 4.8 vs Muse Spark 1.1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 31 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

78.34/100
Margin
0.9pts
← winning
77.44/100
2 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Claude Opus 4.8 #5 (Supported); Muse Spark 1.1 #6 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Spark 1.1 share 31 comparable benchmark results. 4 of 8 categories are comparable. 22 results are unique to Claude Opus 4.8; 8 to Muse Spark 1.1.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
31
Claude Opus 4.8 only
22
Muse Spark 1.1 only
8
Comparable categories
4 / 8

Pick Claude Opus 4.8 if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Muse Spark 1.1 only becomes the better choice if multimodal & grounded is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 31 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 4 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Claude Opus 4.8 has the cleaner BenchAlign overall profile here, landing at 78.34 versus 77.44. It is a real lead, but still close enough that category-level strengths matter more than the headline number.

Claude Opus 4.8's sharpest advantage is in coding, where it averages 81.1 against 61.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is SWE-bench Pro, 69.2% to 61.5%. Muse Spark 1.1 does hit back in multimodal & grounded, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Claude Opus 4.8 and Muse Spark 1.1
CategoryClaude Opus 4.8ΔMuse Spark 1.1
CodingClaude Opus 4.881.1Margin← 19.6Muse Spark 1.161.5
MultimodalClaude Opus 4.877.0Margin→ 11.4Muse Spark 1.188.4
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.862.7Margin← 0.6Muse Spark 1.162.1
AgenticClaude Opus 4.880.3Margin→ 0.1Muse Spark 1.180.4
MathClaude Opus 4.853.9MarginNo overlapMuse Spark 1.1Not measured

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Claude Opus 4.8B · Muse Spark 1.1

  1. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 69.2%B 61.5%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 7.7
    SWE-bench Pro: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 69.2%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 61.5%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 74.6%B 80%
    Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 5.4
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 74.6%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 80%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark.

  3. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 57.9%B 62.1%
    Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 4.2
    HLE: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 57.9%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 62.1%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark.

  4. OSWorld-Verified

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 83.4%B 80.8%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 2.6
    OSWorld-Verified: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 83.4%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 80.8%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

  5. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 89.9%B 88.4%
    Winner: Claude Opus 4.8Δ 1.5
    CharXiv: Claude Opus 4.8 scored 89.9%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 88.4%. Claude Opus 4.8 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensClaude Opus 4.8$5 input / $25 outputMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondClaude Opus 4.8Not availableMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenClaude Opus 4.8Not availableMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensClaude Opus 4.81MMuse Spark 1.11MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticMuse Spark 1.1 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%80%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
BrowseCompSource 84.3%—Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 93.1%84.9%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
OSWorld-VerifiedSource 83.4%80.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
Finance Agent v2Source 53.9%57.2%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GDPval-AASource 15941374Claude Opus 4.8 leads
MCP AtlasSource 82.2%88.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
ToolathlonSource 59.9%75.6%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Gert LabsSource 72.97%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 47.2%37.5%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 94.4%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 54.7%43.7%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
ResearchClawBenchSource 21.1%—Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source 20.6%14.2%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA BriefcaseSource 1347863Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA AutomationBenchSource 48.5%42.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 44.0%—Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 91.1%93.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA Tau3 BankingSource 27.6%25.2%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
terminalBenchHardSource 58.3%—Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source 84.6%77.9%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CyberGymSource —59.0%Not comparable
deepSweSource —53.3%Not comparable
JobBenchSource —54.7%Not comparable
CybenchSource —92.9%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource —0.8%Not comparable
CodingClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Result
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 88.6%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 69.2%61.5%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 84.4%—Not comparable
SWE MultimodalSource 38.4%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 74.6%80.0%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
cursorBench31Source 58.4%—Not comparable
cursorBench32Source 62.3%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 74.3%71.3%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 53.5%58.2%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
FrontierCode 1.1 MainSource 46.5%—Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Result
AA-LCRSource 67.7%63.3%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CritPtSource 20.9%15.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
MRCR 1MSource —54.1%Not comparable
KnowledgeClaude Opus 4.8 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Result
GPQASource 93.6%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 93.6%—Not comparable
HLESource 57.9%62.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 49.8%52.2%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 55.7%50.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 92.0%89.8%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-HLESource 45.7%45.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 27.4%18.0%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 46.6%40.6%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 35.9%38.1%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
HealthBench ProfessionalSource —59.3%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Result
USAMO 2026Source 96.7%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 47.241%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 31.250%—Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Result
INCLUDESource 87.6%—Not comparable
MultimodalMuse Spark 1.1 wins
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Result
OfficeQA ProSource 66.2%—Not comparable
ScreenSpot ProSource 87.9%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 89.9%88.4%Claude Opus 4.8 leads
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 80.5%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12701299Muse Spark 1.1 leads
BabyVisionSource —76.3%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.8Muse Spark 1.1Result
AA-IFBenchSource 62.2%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (5)

Which is better, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Claude Opus 4.8 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 78.34 to 77.44. The biggest single separator in this matchup is SWE-bench Pro, where the scores are 69.2% and 61.5%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.7 versus 62.1. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Index is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Claude Opus 4.8 has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 81.1 versus 61.5. Inside this category, SWE-bench Pro is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 80.3. Inside this category, AA Briefcase is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Claude Opus 4.8 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 88.4 versus 77. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Anthropic Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.