Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) vs Muse Spark 1.1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 24 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

N/A
No comparison
77.44/100
1 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) unranked (Not scored); Muse Spark 1.1 #6 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Muse Spark 1.1 share 24 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 21 results are unique to DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max); 15 to Muse Spark 1.1.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
24
DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) only
21
Muse Spark 1.1 only
15
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Treat this as a split decision. DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) makes more sense if coding is the priority; Muse Spark 1.1 is the better fit if agentic is the priority.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 24 shared benchmark results across 5 evidence categories; 3 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Muse Spark 1.1 finish on the same BenchAlign overall score, so this is less about a single winner and more about where the edge shows up. The BenchAlign headline says tie; the benchmark table is where the real choice happens.

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 DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Muse Spark 1.1
CategoryDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)ΔMuse Spark 1.1
AgenticDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)63.8Margin→ 16.6Muse Spark 1.180.4
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)68.8Margin← 7.3Muse Spark 1.161.5
KnowledgeDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)55.3Margin→ 6.8Muse Spark 1.162.1
MathDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)94.8MarginNo overlapMuse Spark 1.1Not measured
MultimodalDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark 1.188.4

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)B · Muse Spark 1.1

  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 34.8%B 62.1%
    Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 27.3
    HLE: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 34.8%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 62.1%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark.

  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 56.9%B 80%
    Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 23.1
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 56.9%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 80%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark.

  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 52.6%B 61.5%
    Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 8.9
    SWE-bench Pro: DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) scored 52.6%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 61.5%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Muse Spark 1.1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)$0.14 input / $0.28 outputMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not availableMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Not availableMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)1MMuse Spark 1.11MListed context windows are equal.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticMuse Spark 1.1 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Muse Spark 1.1Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.9%80%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
BrowseCompSource 73.2%—Not comparable
HLE w/ toolsSource 45.1%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 69%88.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
GDPval-AASource 11891374Muse Spark 1.1 leads
ToolathlonSource 47.8%75.6%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 31.1%37.5%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 95%—Not comparable
GDPval-AASource 34.4%43.7%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA BriefcaseSource 831863Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 39.6%—Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 81.3%93.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA ITBenchSource 31.5%—Not comparable
AA Tau3 BankingSource 22.9%25.2%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
terminalBenchHardSource 35.6%—Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource —80.8%Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource —84.9%Not comparable
CyberGymSource —59.0%Not comparable
Finance Agent v2Source —57.2%Not comparable
deepSweSource —53.3%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source —14.2%Not comparable
JobBenchSource —54.7%Not comparable
CybenchSource —92.9%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource —0.8%Not comparable
AA AutomationBenchSource —42.8%Not comparable
aaTerminalBench21Source —77.9%Not comparable
CodingDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Muse Spark 1.1Result
CodeforcesSource 3052.0—Not comparable
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 79%—Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource 52.6%61.5%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
SWE MultilingualSource 73.3%—Not comparable
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 56.9%80.0%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA Coding IndexSource 56.2%71.3%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 44.9%58.2%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Reasoning
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Muse Spark 1.1Result
MRCR 1MSource 78.7%54.1%DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) leads
CorpusQA 1MSource 60.5%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 63.0%63.3%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
CritPtSource 7.1%15.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
KnowledgeMuse Spark 1.1 wins
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Muse Spark 1.1Result
MMLU-ProSource 86.2%—Not comparable
SimpleQASource 34.1%—Not comparable
Chinese-SimpleQASource 78.9%—Not comparable
GPQASource 88.1%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 88.1%—Not comparable
HLESource 34.8%62.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 40.3%50.6%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 89.4%89.8%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA-HLESource 32.1%45.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource -22.9%18.0%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 37.2%40.6%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 95.8%38.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA Openness IndexSource 50.0%—Not comparable
HLE w/o toolsSource —52.2%Not comparable
HealthBench ProfessionalSource —59.3%Not comparable
Math
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Muse Spark 1.1Result
HMMT Feb 2026Source 94.8%—Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource 88.4%—Not comparable
ApexSource 33.0%—Not comparable
Apex ShortlistSource 85.7%—Not comparable
Multimodal
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Muse Spark 1.1Result
Design Arena WebsiteSource 12381299Muse Spark 1.1 leads
CharXivSource —88.4%Not comparable
BabyVisionSource —76.3%Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkDeepSeek V4 Flash (Max)Muse Spark 1.1Result
AA-IFBenchSource 79.2%—Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Muse Spark 1.1?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) and Muse Spark 1.1 are tied on the BenchAlign overall score, so the right pick depends on which category matters most for your use case.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.1 versus 55.3. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Muse Spark 1.1?

DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 68.8 versus 61.5. Inside this category, Terminal-Bench 2.0 is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, DeepSeek V4 Flash (Max) or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 80.4 versus 63.8. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

DeepSeek 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.