HyperNova 60B 2605 vs Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh)
Which is better for the money: HyperNova 60B 2605 by Multiverse Computing or Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-07-17.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) scores 32.8 points higher (50.6 vs 17.8) but costs 16× as much to run the benchmark ($548 vs $35.0; premium vs budget cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) when you need intelligence above 17.8, and HyperNova 60B 2605 when 17.8 is enough.
| Metric | HyperNova 60B 2605 | Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 17.8 | 50.6 | +184.3% Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) is 2.8× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $35.05 | $548.07 | +1463.7% Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) is 16× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 8.32s | 22.53s | +170.8% Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) is 170.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.04 / $0.14 | $1.25 / $4.25 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) vs HyperNova 60B 2605: 184.3% more intelligence, 1463.7% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 170.8% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- HyperNova 60B 2605 is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, MiMo-V2.5 scores 37.20 for $25.2.
- Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh) is on today's frontier: nothing is both smarter and cheaper.
HyperNova 60B 2605Muse Spark 1.1 (xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/hypernova-60b/muse-spark-1-1 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/hypernova-60b/muse-spark-1-1?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill