Model Comparison

Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Muse Spark 1.1Which is better in 2026?

Comparing Claude 3.5 Haiku and Muse Spark 1.1 across benchmarks, pricing, and capabilities.

Verdict: Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Muse Spark 1.1 — which is better?

Claude 3.5 Haiku (by Anthropic) and Muse Spark 1.1 (by Meta) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.

On price, Claude 3.5 Haiku is roughly 1.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Muse Spark 1.1 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.

Choose Claude 3.5 Haiku if…

  • cost matters — it's about 1.3x cheaper per token

Choose Muse Spark 1.1 if…

  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jul 2026

Performance Benchmarks

Comparative analysis across standard metrics

No common benchmarks found

Claude 3.5 Haiku and Muse Spark 1.1don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Arena Performance

Human preference votes

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Claude 3.5 Haiku costs less

For input processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($0.80/1M tokens) is 1.6x cheaper than Muse Spark 1.1 ($1.25/1M tokens).

For output processing, Claude 3.5 Haiku ($4.00/1M tokens) is 1.1x cheaper than Muse Spark 1.1 ($4.25/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Muse Spark 1.1 is more expensive than Claude 3.5 Haiku.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Jul 18 2026 • llm-stats.com
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input tokens$0.80
Output tokens$4.00
Best providerAWS Bedrock
Meta
Muse Spark 1.1
Input tokens$1.25
Output tokens$4.25
Best providerMeta
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Muse Spark 1.1 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Claude 3.5 Haiku's 200,000 tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku can generate longer responses up to 200,000 tokens, while Muse Spark 1.1 is limited to 131,072 tokens.

Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Input200,000 tokens
Output200,000 tokens
Meta
Muse Spark 1.1
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Sat Jul 18 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input Capabilities

Supported data types and modalities

Muse Spark 1.1 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Claude 3.5 Haiku does not.

Muse Spark 1.1 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Muse Spark 1.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Both models are licensed under proprietary licenses.

Both models have usage restrictions defined by their respective organizations.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Proprietary

Closed source

Muse Spark 1.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Claude 3.5 Haiku was released on 2024-10-22, while Muse Spark 1.1 was released on 2026-07-09.

Muse Spark 1.1 is 21 months newer than Claude 3.5 Haiku.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

Oct 22, 2024

1.7 years ago

Muse Spark 1.1

Jul 9, 2026

1 weeks ago

1.7yr newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Claude 3.5 Haiku is available from Bedrock, Google, Anthropic. Muse Spark 1.1 is available from Meta Model API.

Claude 3.5 Haiku

bedrock logo
AWS Bedrock
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
google logo
Google
Input Price:Input: $0.80/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.00/1M
anthropic logo
Anthropic
Input Price:Input: $1.00/1MOutput Price:Output: $5.00/1M

Muse Spark 1.1

meta logo
Meta
Input Price:Input: $1.25/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.25/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Key Takeaways

Anthropic
Less expensive input tokens
Less expensive output tokens
Meta
Larger context window (1,048,576 tokens)
Supports multimodal inputs

Detailed Comparison

Interactive Arena

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Claude 3.5 Haiku and Muse Spark 1.1 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Claude 3.5 Haiku
✓ Preferred
Muse Spark 1.1
Open in Playground
AI Model Comparison Table
Feature
Anthropic
Claude 3.5 Haiku
Meta
Muse Spark 1.1

FAQ

Common questions about Claude 3.5 Haiku vs Muse Spark 1.1.

Which is better, Claude 3.5 Haiku or Muse Spark 1.1?

Claude 3.5 Haiku (Anthropic) and Muse Spark 1.1 (Meta) each have strengths in different areas. Compare their benchmark scores, pricing, context windows, and capabilities above to determine which fits your needs.

How does Claude 3.5 Haiku compare to Muse Spark 1.1 in benchmarks?

Claude 3.5 Haiku scores HumanEval: 88.1%, MGSM: 85.6%, DROP: 83.1%, MATH: 69.4%, MMLU-Pro: 65.0%. Muse Spark 1.1 scores CharXiv-R: 88.4%, MCP Atlas: 88.1%, OSWorld-Verified: 80.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 80.0%, BabyVision: 76.3%.

Is Claude 3.5 Haiku cheaper than Muse Spark 1.1?

Claude 3.5 Haiku is 1.6x cheaper for input tokens. Claude 3.5 Haiku costs $0.80/M input and $4.00/M output via bedrock. Muse Spark 1.1 costs $1.25/M input and $4.25/M output via meta.

What are the context window sizes for Claude 3.5 Haiku and Muse Spark 1.1?

Claude 3.5 Haiku supports 200K tokens and Muse Spark 1.1 supports 1.0M tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Claude 3.5 Haiku and Muse Spark 1.1?

Key differences include context window (200K vs 1.0M), input pricing ($0.80 vs $1.25/M), multimodal support (no vs yes). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Claude 3.5 Haiku and Muse Spark 1.1?

Claude 3.5 Haiku is developed by Anthropic and Muse Spark 1.1 is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons