They chose to compare against Open AI’s mid tier model Terra instead of Sol and still lost some benchmark against it.
They left Opus in and got beat in all but one benchmark.
Nothing wrong with trying to improve, but why the marketing games?
Instead of trying to say in the post you’re “closer” to frontier, first set a clear goal to beat the Chinese labs on price or performance and demonstrate it convincingly.
Then when your ready, come back and talk frontier without playing hide the model.
bradfa 13 minutes ago [-]
If you got the $20 in free credits from Meta for signing up when muse-spark-1.1 was release, please note that there's now small print stating "While using free credits your content may be used for product improvement" which was not present at muse-spark-1.1 launch when the credits were given out.
If you don't mind Meta retaining your data, the "Contributor" pricing is deepseek-v4-flash-level of low, roughly 1/10th normal muse-spark API pricing currently. Attractive if you're OK with them retaining and using your data.
AtlanticThird 2 minutes ago [-]
I wish they would add a ZDR endpoint on OpenRouter
wxw 13 minutes ago [-]
Last I heard, everyone at Meta was using Claude Code.
Any insiders know how Muse Code is doing internally?
mchusma 40 minutes ago [-]
This is a nice release and a solid improvement over Spark 1.1. It compares favorably with Grok 4.5. Not SOTA, but solid releases. I think they need to really get this more competitive with Deepseek V4 Flash / Luna pricing to move the needle.
handzhiev 18 minutes ago [-]
If you are happy to share data for training, the contributor mode offers amazing price $0.10 / $0.20
Very interesting they have a way cheaper "contributor" version "used to improve our products", how much of that is price discrimination vs the data being that valuable?
Roughly DeepSeek V4 Flash pricing, though you can get V4 from providers that don't train on your data
IceWreck 9 minutes ago [-]
Ive been poking with the muse code binary - seems to be written in rust, looks similar to codex but either its a very hard fork (i also see dissimilar things like config format is different, no acp, etc) or is just heavily inspired by it.
Interesting that they have separate API pricing for "we can train on your data" (whereas iirc most of the big players either make that distinction only between subscriptions and API usage, or train on everything). Wonder how it compares to Deepseek V4 Flash given that they're similar on pricing and data policy.
Cappybara12 11 minutes ago [-]
Is this becoming a race where we have a usual flow of a company ..
AI models,
Coding agents,
image generation tools,
and more AI models ?
ipsum2 55 minutes ago [-]
I wonder why they didn't compare with GPT-5.6-sol, only Terra?
woadwarrior01 44 minutes ago [-]
Haven't you seen the kernel optimization case study at the bottom of the page? They compare against GPT-5.6 Sol and their model is worse.
wmf 50 minutes ago [-]
Clearly they're positioning it as a mid model.
minimaxir 44 minutes ago [-]
Which is in itself a bit weird as mid models nowadays are a golden mean fallacy. Terra is much less popular than both Luna (cost-sensitive) and Sol (performance-sensitive).
Claude Sonnet is a weird exception to the mid models because Anthropic doesn't do much with Haiku and Opus is too big.
redox99 4 minutes ago [-]
But why include Opus then?
logicchains 49 minutes ago [-]
Presumably because it's worse than Sol, same reason they compared it to Opus 5 not Fable.
Handy-Man 42 minutes ago [-]
Their bigger model is not ready - watermelon code name was still being prepared for release as of a month ago
giancarlostoro 21 minutes ago [-]
Will someone at Meta for the love of God make it so none of this stuff goes through Facebook.com? You want customers but most corporate firewalls block social media. Also, a lot of devs do not want their work stuff tied up to their facebook account. For the love of all things show the IG / FB logins as optional and do email as primary.
I am not a fan of Meta but I do cheer for any competitors against OpenAI and Anthropic, the duopoly is getting tiresome.
aanet 19 minutes ago [-]
+10000 to that
minimaxir 48 minutes ago [-]
Muse Spark 1.1 was released July 16th, less than a month ago. A new version release this soon (particularly after Kimi K3's release drastically overshadowed it) is a bit sus and it appears that Meta is trying a first launch do-over.
Bolwin 46 minutes ago [-]
> Muse Spark 1.2 is available today in Muse Code and in Meta Model API with expanded global access
Wasn't the previous one us only? This is probably the biggest part of the post
Anyone know if muse code is open source?
liviux 29 minutes ago [-]
Does this muse code have any muse spark 1.2 usage included? Can't understand from the docs.
king_crimson 14 minutes ago [-]
Why does every AI lab feel the need to build their own coding agent…? Don’t we have more than enough already?
2 minutes ago [-]
fcoury 28 minutes ago [-]
Interesting, it seems like their muse code is built upon Codex CLI?
qphe95 46 minutes ago [-]
Theres no actual evidence they didn't just distill Kimi K3
Jabrov 11 minutes ago [-]
Is there any actual evidence that they did?
toephu2 31 minutes ago [-]
At this point, it doesn't matter who is distilling from who.
kcb 39 minutes ago [-]
Open the weights.
paulkrush 1 hours ago [-]
Muse Spark 1.2 is a coding-focused update to Muse Spark 1.1, with improvements in code generation, complex debugging, codebase understanding, and end-to-end developer workflows. In Muse Spark 1.2, we significantly scaled up training compute on coding tasks while expanding training environment diversity. The model also maintains its strength in other key areas like general agents.
esafak 31 minutes ago [-]
If anyone from Meta is reading, please can you publish the cost and latency for each of your benchmarks, like OpenAI does? Show us how the reasoning effort level affects them in 2D charts. This needs to become standard practice.
Readerium 9 minutes ago [-]
Lol worse than DeepSeek
rvz 48 minutes ago [-]
First of all, you have login to use it. Why?
After everything that you have seen with Meta, would you really trust them with a coding agent? You don't even know if your prompts are being analyzed by them on the side or if your code base is being uploaded to them. This goes for the rest of them that have closed harnesses and closed models gated by a login.
Think twice before falling for this announcement and ask yourself what they are not telling you.
Rendered at 20:30:00 GMT+0000 (Coordinated Universal Time) with Vercel.
They left Opus in and got beat in all but one benchmark.
Nothing wrong with trying to improve, but why the marketing games?
Instead of trying to say in the post you’re “closer” to frontier, first set a clear goal to beat the Chinese labs on price or performance and demonstrate it convincingly.
Then when your ready, come back and talk frontier without playing hide the model.
If you don't mind Meta retaining your data, the "Contributor" pricing is deepseek-v4-flash-level of low, roughly 1/10th normal muse-spark API pricing currently. Attractive if you're OK with them retaining and using your data.
Any insiders know how Muse Code is doing internally?
Very interesting they have a way cheaper "contributor" version "used to improve our products", how much of that is price discrimination vs the data being that valuable?
Roughly DeepSeek V4 Flash pricing, though you can get V4 from providers that don't train on your data
Interesting that they have separate API pricing for "we can train on your data" (whereas iirc most of the big players either make that distinction only between subscriptions and API usage, or train on everything). Wonder how it compares to Deepseek V4 Flash given that they're similar on pricing and data policy.
Claude Sonnet is a weird exception to the mid models because Anthropic doesn't do much with Haiku and Opus is too big.
I am not a fan of Meta but I do cheer for any competitors against OpenAI and Anthropic, the duopoly is getting tiresome.
Wasn't the previous one us only? This is probably the biggest part of the post
Anyone know if muse code is open source?
After everything that you have seen with Meta, would you really trust them with a coding agent? You don't even know if your prompts are being analyzed by them on the side or if your code base is being uploaded to them. This goes for the rest of them that have closed harnesses and closed models gated by a login.
Think twice before falling for this announcement and ask yourself what they are not telling you.