Llama 4 Scout vs Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh)
Which is better for the money: Llama 4 Scout by Meta or Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) by Meta? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-25.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) scores 33.1 points higher (39.6 vs 6.5) but costs 19× as much to run the benchmark ($1385 vs $73.6; premium vs mid-range cost classes). They are not alternatives at one budget: pick Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) when you need intelligence above 6.5, and Llama 4 Scout when 6.5 is enough.
| Metric | Llama 4 Scout | Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 6.5 | 39.6 | +509.2% Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) is 6.1× more intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $73.56 | $1,385.40 | +1783.4% Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) is 19× more expensive |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 4.99s | 20.60s | +312.8% Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) is 312.8% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $0.18 / $0.66 | $1.25 / $4.25 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image, Speech, Video |
Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) vs Llama 4 Scout: 509.2% more intelligence, 1783.4% more cost to run the AA benchmark, and 312.8% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Llama 4 Scout is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6 Luna (Xhigh) scores 34.60 for $66.8.
- Muse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GPT-6.1 Sol (Max) scores 51.80 for $1082.
Llama 4 ScoutMuse Spark 1.2 (Xhigh)Today's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-scout/muse-spark-1-2 · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/llama-4-scout/muse-spark-1-2?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill