Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Kimi K3 vs Muse Spark 1.1

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 26 shared benchmark results across 5 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

Kimi K3
Moonshot AI
80.96/100
Margin
3.5pts
← winning
77.44/100
1 category wins2 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Kimi K3 #4 (Supported); Muse Spark 1.1 #6 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Kimi K3 and Muse Spark 1.1 share 26 comparable benchmark results. 3 of 8 categories are comparable. 31 results are unique to Kimi K3; 13 to Muse Spark 1.1.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
26
Kimi K3 only
31
Muse Spark 1.1 only
13
Comparable categories
3 / 8

Pick Kimi K3 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 26 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

Kimi K3 is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 80.96 to 77.44. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Kimi K3's sharpest advantage is in agentic, where it averages 89.5 against 80.4. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is Terminal-Bench 2.0, 88.3% to 80%. 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.

Kimi K3 gives you the larger context window at 1.05M, compared with 1M for Muse Spark 1.1.

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 Kimi K3 and Muse Spark 1.1
CategoryKimi K3ΔMuse Spark 1.1
MultimodalKimi K378.5Margin→ 9.9Muse Spark 1.188.4
AgenticKimi K389.5Margin← 9.1Muse Spark 1.180.4
KnowledgeKimi K361.0Margin→ 1.1Muse Spark 1.162.1
CodingKimi K3Not measuredMarginNo overlapMuse Spark 1.161.5

Decisive benchmark drivers

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

More
A · Kimi K3B · Muse Spark 1.1

  1. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 88.3%B 80%
    Winner: Kimi K3Δ 8.3
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Kimi K3 scored 88.3%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 80%. Kimi K3 wins this benchmark.

  2. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 56%B 62.1%
    Winner: Muse Spark 1.1Δ 6.1
    HLE: Kimi K3 scored 56%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 62.1%. Muse Spark 1.1 wins this benchmark.

  3. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 91.3%B 88.4%
    Winner: Kimi K3Δ 2.9
    CharXiv: Kimi K3 scored 91.3%; Muse Spark 1.1 scored 88.4%. Kimi K3 wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

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

MetricKimi K3Muse Spark 1.1Comparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensKimi K3$3 input / $15 outputMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondKimi K3Not availableMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenKimi K3Not availableMuse Spark 1.1Not availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensKimi K31.05MMuse Spark 1.11MKimi K3 lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticKimi K3 wins
BenchmarkKimi K3Muse Spark 1.1Result
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 88.3%80%Kimi K3 leads
BrowseCompSource 91.2%—Not comparable
DeepSearchQASource 95.0%84.9%Kimi K3 leads
Toolathlon-VerifiedSource 73.2%—Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource 84.2%88.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AutomationBenchSource 30.8%—Not comparable
JobBenchSource 52.9%54.7%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
APEX-AgentsSource 37.6%—Not comparable
SpreadsheetBench 2Source 34.8%—Not comparable
DECK-BenchSource 73.5%—Not comparable
AA Agentic IndexSource 50.1%37.5%Kimi K3 leads
GDPval-AASource 59.0%43.7%Kimi K3 leads
GDPval-AASource 16791374Kimi K3 leads
AA BriefcaseSource 1543863Kimi K3 leads
AA AutomationBenchSource 52.7%42.8%Kimi K3 leads
AA EnterpriseOps-GymSource 45.3%—Not comparable
AA Harvey LABSource 94.6%93.1%Kimi K3 leads
AA Tau3 BankingSource 33.4%25.2%Kimi K3 leads
aaTerminalBench21Source 85%77.9%Kimi K3 leads
APEX-Agents-AASource 41.3%—Not comparable
AA ITBenchSource 47.7%—Not comparable
ToolathlonSource —75.6%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource —80.8%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
CybenchSource —92.9%Not comparable
ExploitGymSource —0.8%Not comparable
Coding
BenchmarkKimi K3Muse Spark 1.1Result
deepSweSource 67.5%—Not comparable
FrontierSWESource 81.2%—Not comparable
ProgramBenchSource 77.8%—Not comparable
Kimi Code Bench v2Source 72.9%—Not comparable
sweMarathonSource 42%—Not comparable
PostTrain BenchSource 36.6%—Not comparable
MLS-Bench LiteSource 48.3%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 76.2%71.3%Kimi K3 leads
AA-SciCodeSource 58.7%58.2%Kimi K3 leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —80.0%Not comparable
SWE-bench ProSource —61.5%Not comparable
Reasoning
BenchmarkKimi K3Muse Spark 1.1Result
AA-LCRSource 74.7%63.3%Kimi K3 leads
CritPtSource 23.4%15.1%Kimi K3 leads
MRCR 1MSource —54.1%Not comparable
KnowledgeMuse Spark 1.1 wins
BenchmarkKimi K3Muse Spark 1.1Result
GPQASource 93.5%—Not comparable
GPQA-DSource 93.5%—Not comparable
HLESource 56%62.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 43.5%52.2%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 57.1%50.6%Kimi K3 leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 93.5%89.8%Kimi K3 leads
AA-HLESource 44.3%45.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 18.4%18.0%Kimi K3 leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 46.0%40.6%Kimi K3 leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 50.9%38.1%Muse Spark 1.1 leads
HealthBench ProfessionalSource —59.3%Not comparable
MultimodalMuse Spark 1.1 wins
BenchmarkKimi K3Muse Spark 1.1Result
OfficeQA ProSource 63.3%—Not comparable
MMMU-ProSource 81.6%—Not comparable
MMMU-Pro w/ PythonSource 83.4%—Not comparable
CharXiv w/o toolsSource 84.8%—Not comparable
CharXivSource 91.3%88.4%Kimi K3 leads
MathVisionSource 94.3%—Not comparable
MathVision w/ PythonSource 97.8%—Not comparable
BabyVision w/ PythonSource 85.7%—Not comparable
ZeroBenchSource 23.0%—Not comparable
ZeroBench w/ PythonSource 41.0%—Not comparable
WorldVQA ForceAnswerSource 51.0%—Not comparable
OmniDocBenchSource 91.1%—Not comparable
PerceptionBenchSource 58.5%—Not comparable
AA-MMMU-ProSource 80.5%—Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource 13861299Kimi K3 leads
BabyVisionSource —76.3%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (4)

Which is better, Kimi K3 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Kimi K3 is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 80.96 to 77.44. The biggest single separator in this matchup is Terminal-Bench 2.0, where the scores are 88.3% and 80%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Kimi K3 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 62.1 versus 61. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Kimi K3 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Kimi K3 has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 89.5 versus 80.4. Inside this category, AA Briefcase is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Kimi K3 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 88.4 versus 78.5. Inside this category, Design Arena Website is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Moonshot AI 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.