The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

MiMo-V2.5 vs Muse Spark 1.3

Muse Spark 1.3 leads the LLM Stats Score 55.3 to 35.4. Muse Spark 1.3 is 1.7x cheaper per token.

Xiaomi · Meta · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Muse Spark 1.3 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 55.3 to 35.4, ranking #5 overall.

On price, Muse Spark 1.3 is roughly 1.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose MiMo-V2.5

  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

Choose Muse Spark 1.3

  • overall performance matters — it scores 55.3 and ranks #5 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • cost matters — it's about 1.7x cheaper per token
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

MiMo-V2.5
Xiaomi
Muse Spark 1.3
Meta
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
35.4
#82
55.3
#5
Reasoning
35.5
#75
52.8
#7
Coding
27.0
#57
41.7
#10
Agents
18.7
#60
40.4
#4
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$0.17 / M
$0.10 / M
Output price
$0.34 / M
$0.20 / M
Context window
1,048,576
1,048,576

Individual benchmarks

14 reported for MiMo-V2.5 · 11 for Muse Spark 1.3

No common benchmarks found

MiMo-V2.5 and Muse Spark 1.3don't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Pricing Analysis

Price comparison per million tokens

Muse Spark 1.3 costs less

For input processing, MiMo-V2.5 ($0.17/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Muse Spark 1.3 ($0.10/1M tokens).

For output processing, MiMo-V2.5 ($0.34/1M tokens) is 1.7x more expensive than Muse Spark 1.3 ($0.20/1M tokens).

In conclusion, MiMo-V2.5 is more expensive than Muse Spark 1.3.*

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

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Sep 05 2026 • llm-stats.com
Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5
Input tokens$0.17
Output tokens$0.34
Best providerNovita
Meta
Muse Spark 1.3
Input tokens$0.10
Output tokens$0.20
Best providerMeta
Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue→

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Both models have the same input context window of 1,048,576 tokens. Muse Spark 1.3 can generate longer responses up to 943,718 tokens, while MiMo-V2.5 is limited to 131,072 tokens.

Xiaomi
MiMo-V2.5
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Meta
Muse Spark 1.3
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output943,718 tokens
Sat Sep 05 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both MiMo-V2.5 and Muse Spark 1.3 support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

MiMo-V2.5

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Muse Spark 1.3

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

MiMo-V2.5 is licensed under MIT, while Muse Spark 1.3 uses a proprietary license.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

MiMo-V2.5

MIT

Open weights

Muse Spark 1.3

Proprietary

Closed source

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

MiMo-V2.5 was released on 2026-04-22, while Muse Spark 1.3 was released on 2026-09-02.

Muse Spark 1.3 is 4 months newer than MiMo-V2.5.

MiMo-V2.5

Apr 22, 2026

4 months ago

Muse Spark 1.3

Sep 2, 2026

3 days ago

4mo 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

MiMo-V2.5 is available from Novita, DeepInfra. Muse Spark 1.3 is available from Meta Model API.

MiMo-V2.5

novita logo
Novita
Input Price:Input: $0.17/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.34/1M
deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.40/1MOutput Price:Output: $2.00/1M

Muse Spark 1.3

meta logo
Meta
Input Price:Input: $0.10/1MOutput Price:Output: $0.20/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against MiMo-V2.5 and Muse Spark 1.3 side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

MiMo-V2.5
✓ Preferred
Muse Spark 1.3
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about MiMo-V2.5 vs Muse Spark 1.3.

Which is better, MiMo-V2.5 or Muse Spark 1.3?

Muse Spark 1.3 leads the LLM Stats Score 55.3 to 35.4. MiMo-V2.5 is made by Xiaomi and Muse Spark 1.3 is made by Meta. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does MiMo-V2.5 compare to Muse Spark 1.3 in benchmarks?

MiMo-V2.5 scores HR-Bench (4k): 88.5%, Video-MME: 87.7%, OmniDocBench: 87.2%, GraphWalks: 87.0%, DailyOmni: 83.5%. Muse Spark 1.3 scores MRCR v2 (8-needle): 98.5%, MRCR v2 (8-needle, 512K-1M): 98.1%, DeepSearchQA: 89.4%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 88.8%, DeepSWE 1.1: 75.4%.

Is MiMo-V2.5 cheaper than Muse Spark 1.3?

Muse Spark 1.3 is 1.7x cheaper for input tokens. MiMo-V2.5 costs $0.17/M input and $0.34/M output via novita. Muse Spark 1.3 costs $0.10/M input and $0.20/M output via meta.

What are the context window sizes for MiMo-V2.5 and Muse Spark 1.3?

MiMo-V2.5 supports 1.0M tokens and Muse Spark 1.3 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 MiMo-V2.5 and Muse Spark 1.3?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (35.4 vs 55.3), input pricing ($0.17 vs $0.10/M), licensing (MIT vs Proprietary). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes MiMo-V2.5 and Muse Spark 1.3?

MiMo-V2.5 is developed by Xiaomi and Muse Spark 1.3 is developed by Meta.

Related comparisons