Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.2 vs Ring-2.6-1T

Muse Spark 1.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 2 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.2 Meta

49.8

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 2 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher in 2 categories and Ring-2.6-1T in 0 categories; 2 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 50.4 to 25.3.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is SciCode: 56.4% for Muse Spark 1.2 and 42.4% for Ring-2.6-1T.
  • Ring-2.6-1T has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.2 and Ring-2.6-1T specifications
Muse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
ProviderMetaAnt Group (inclusionAI)
Noometry Index49.836.3
Released2026-08-052026-05-14
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked283

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 48.6 (#49), Ring-2.6-1T: 40.1

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
SciCode56.4%42.4%
DeepSWE54.9%—
LMArena WebDev1532—
FrontierSWE12%—
WeirdML60.3%—
LMArena Coding1497—
ALE-Bench—432.57

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 29.5 (#77), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
APEX-Agents36.4%—
GDP.pdf16%—

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 50.4 (#32), Ring-2.6-1T: 25.3

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
CritPt17.7%3.7%
SimpleBench74.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.2%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1490—
DTBench94.7%—
LMCA48.4%—
Epoch Capabilities Index155.18—

Math Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 43.8 (#68), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
ProofBench43%—

Knowledge Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 53.9 (#49), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
SimpleQA Verified60.3%—
LMArena Expert1485—

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 42.6 (#24), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 57.4 (#10), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Non-English1479—
LMArena Chinese1519—
LMArena Russian1494—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 77.1 (#30), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Instruction Following1466—

Long Context Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 45.4 (#35), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Longer Query1483—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 72.6 (#14), Ring-2.6-1T: —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Ring-2.6-1T
LMArena Text1486—
LMArena Creative Writing1444—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
LMArena Multi-Turn1504—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.2 better than Ring-2.6-1T?

Muse Spark 1.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); Ring-2.6-1T does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Is Muse Spark 1.2 or Ring-2.6-1T better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.6 versus 40.1 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.2 and Ring-2.6-1T share?

2 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.2 has 28 scored results on Noometry and Ring-2.6-1T has 3.

Related comparisons

Go deeper