Skip to content
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed
  1. Home
  2. /
  3. Compare
  4. /
  5. Claude Opus 5.5vsMuse Spark 1.1
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 5.5vsMuse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper than Claude Opus 5.5 at $1.25/M vs $4/M input tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 and Muse Spark 1.1 compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5.5Muse Spark 1.1
Input price$4/M tokens$1.25/M tokens
Output price$20/M tokens$4.25/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens1.0M tokens
WeightsClosedClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Jul 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

Opening lines from 6 of the 19 prompts both answered. Formatting stripped, words untouched.

Debug This Architecture

Here's the architecture for a real-time collaborative document editor (like Google Docs): **System Overview:** - Frontend: React SPA with…

Claude Opus 5.52,280 words
Architecture Review: Real-Time Collaborative Editor The most serious problems cluster in three areas: the sync model (client-clock LWW), cross-server propagation (per-server WebSockets with DB polling), and the CDN/auth layer, which can leak data between users. Issues are grouped by area below.
Read the full answer
Muse Spark 1.11,064 words
This architecture will fail in production under even moderate load and 2+ concurrent users. Here is a breakdown by severity. REAL-TIME SYNC - CRITICAL A. Split-Brain Broadcast Server broadcasts change to all WebSocket clients connected to THAT server + Other servers poll PostgreSQL every 2 seconds Failure: User A on…
Read the full answer

Advanced Investment Memo (IC Memo)

You are writing an internal investment committee memo for a long/short equity fund. Company (fictional): LedgerLift (ticker: LLLT) – B2B…

Claude Opus 5.51,335 words
IC Memo: LedgerLift (LLLT): Short, Starter Size, Hedged vs. Peer Basket Fictional exercise. Not investment advice. Recommendation Short (starter size, 1–1.5% gross), paired against a long basket of Peers A, B and C. 12-month price target range: $36–42 (current price $46, implying 9–22% downside). Thesis.
Read the full answer
Muse Spark 1.1741 words
IC MEMO – LedgerLift (LLLT) Short – 12M PT $28 [Range: $17 Bear / $42 Bull] Price: $46 MCap $8.74B EV $7.34B [190m shares, $1.4B net cash] FY25 Rev $820m Thesis in 2 sentences: LLLT is a good mid-market spend/AP SaaS business with strong NRR, but priced for perfection at ~9.3x NTM rev / 37x NTM EBIT vs our Base DCF of…
Read the full answer

Mini LBO Underwrite

You are underwriting a 5-year LBO for a private equity investment committee. Company (fictional): HarborTech Services (HTS) –…

Claude Opus 5.5900 words
HarborTech Services: 5-Year LBO Underwriting Conventions: $m. Interest is charged on beginning-of-year balances, which avoids circularity. Term Loan (TL) amortization is 1% of the original $480m, or $4.8m per year. Mezz PIK accrues to principal. All FCF after mandatory debt service sweeps to the TL.
Read the full answer
Muse Spark 1.1664 words
HarborTech LBO – 5yr Underwriting – Base Case Entry: End FY25. Exit: End FY30 = 5.0yr hold. Entry Math EV = 12.0x * $120m = $1,440m Fees 2.0% * EV = $28.8m Uses = $1,468.8m Sources: Term 4.0x = $480m, Mezz 1.5x = $180m, Total Debt = $660m = 5.5x Equity = $1,468.8 - $660 = $808.8m Cash at close $0 Debt Terms Assumed…
Read the full answer

Michelin Star Recipe Design

Design an innovative recipe for a multi-component dish worthy of a Michelin 3-star restaurant. The recipe should feature an unusual…

Claude Opus 5.52,253 words
"Hive & Tide" Langoustine, Beeswax, White Chocolate & Oscietra Caviar, Hay-Baked Celeriac, Fermented Green Strawberry, Sea Buckthorn I. The Concept Most coastal menus celebrate the meeting of sea and land. This dish is about a stranger, quieter meeting: the meadow and the seabed, the bee and the langoustine.
Read the full answer
Muse Spark 1.11,225 words
"NEIGE SUR LA VASIÈRE" — Snow on the Mudflat Koji-aged Jerusalem Artichoke, Hokkaido Bafun Uni Custard, Valrhona Ivoire & Kombu Ganache, Oscietra Caviar, Verbena I. THE CONCEPTUAL NARRATIVE This dish is a memory of foraging on the Brittany coast in late November. Low tide in winter.
Read the full answer

Historical Counterfactual Analysis

If the transistor had been invented in 1920 instead of 1947, trace the likely technological, economic, and geopolitical implications through…

Claude Opus 5.53,435 words
The Transistor in 1920: A Counterfactual Through 1980 First, a Reality Check on the Premise A transistor "invented" in 1920 would not have changed the world in 1920. The actual 1947 transistor rested on three foundations that did not exist yet: Quantum theory of solids.
Read the full answer
Muse Spark 1.11,740 words
If the transistor works in 1920 instead of 1947, you don't just get the modern world 27 years early. You get a fundamentally different 20th century. The transistor isn't just a better vacuum tube - it's the prerequisite for everything that needs to be small, reliable, low-power, and mass-producible.
Read the full answer

Advanced Longevity Plan (Biohacker)

Develop a comprehensive, cutting-edge 3-month longevity plan for a biohacker aiming to optimize longevity, physical and cognitive…

Claude Opus 5.53,099 words
The 90-Day Longevity & Performance Protocol A structured, measurable plan for the experienced biohacker How to Use This Plan Philosophy: Measure → Intervene → Re-measure. Every intervention has a hypothesis, a metric, and a decision rule.
Read the full answer
Muse Spark 1.1498 words
This is a 12-week, systems-based longevity protocol designed for an advanced biohacker. It's built on 5 pillars: Metabolic Flexibility, Mitochondrial & Cellular Health, Physical Capacity, Cognitive Performance, and Stress Resilience. DISCLAIMER: This is for educational purposes only and is not medical advice.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
Muse Spark 1.1
Muse Spark 1.1

Not enough votes to call it. On the specs, nothing separates them.

Muse Spark 1.1 costs 4.7x less per token.

Too close to call

Reviewing agent-written code?See a Brief PR report

API pricing

Cost per 1M tokens

Claude Opus 5.5
Input
$4.00
Output
$20.00
Muse Spark 1.1
Input
$1.25
3.2× cheaper
Output
$4.25
4.7× cheaper

Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper on both: 3.2× input, 4.7× output.

Where to run it

5 hosts

Claude Opus 5.54 hosts
HostInOutContextUptime
Amazon Bedrock$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·99.8% upAzure AI Foundry$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upAnthropic$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% upGoogle Vertex AI$4.00 in·$20.00 out·1M·100% up
Muse Spark 1.11 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Meta$1.25 in·$4.25 out·1M·100% up

Per million tokens. Prices and uptime via OpenRouter, checked 25 Sep 2026.

Research

What we learned reading every model

FAQ

Common questions

Claude Opus 5.5 is developed by Anthropic while Muse Spark 1.1 is developed by Meta AI. Claude Opus 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs Muse Spark 1.1's 1.0M. You can compare their actual outputs across 19 challenges on Rival to see how they differ in practice.

It depends on your use case. Claude Opus 5.5 and Muse Spark 1.1 each have strengths in different areas. Rival lets you compare their real outputs side-by-side across 19 challenges so you can judge which fits your needs best.

Claude Opus 5.5 costs $4/M input tokens and Muse Spark 1.1 costs $1.25/M input tokens. Muse Spark 1.1 is $2.75/M cheaper per input. Check their side-by-side outputs on Rival to see if the price difference is justified by quality.

This page shows a side-by-side comparison of Claude Opus 5.5 and Muse Spark 1.1 across shared challenges. You can vote on which model produced the better output in a blind duel. Browsing and voting are free. No account is needed to look; signing in only saves your votes and likes.

Keep exploring

More comparisons

Against the newest arrivals

Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Mini 4 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Mini 4Landed Sep 2026
Muse Spark 1.1 logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 Max PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGLM 5.3 Prime logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GLM 5.3 PrimeLanded Sep 2026
Muse Spark 1.1 logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 Omni FlashLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoCommand A+ logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Command A+Landed Sep 2026
Muse Spark 1.1 logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Muse Spark 1.1 vs GPT-6 Luna ProLanded Sep 2026
Claude Opus 5.5 logoGPT-6 Sol Pro logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs GPT-6 Sol ProLanded Sep 2026
Muse Spark 1.1 logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Muse Spark 1.1 vs GPT-6 LunaLanded Sep 2026

Same lab, same size, long tail

Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Opus 4.6 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Opus 4.6Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoClaude Fable 5.1 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Claude Fable 5.1Same lab
Muse Spark 1.1 logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Muse Glimmer 30BSame lab
Muse Spark 1.1 logoMuse Spark 1.3 logo
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Muse Spark 1.3Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoKimi Linear 48B A3B Instruct logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Kimi Linear 48B A3B InstructNew provider
Muse Spark 1.1 logoLaguna S 2.1 (free) logo
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Laguna S 2.1 (free)Same size
Muse Spark 1.1 logoLaguna XS 2.1 (free) logo
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Laguna XS 2.1 (free)Same size
Claude Opus 5.5 logoLFM2.5-2.6B logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs LFM2.5-2.6BNew provider

Model pages

Claude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 5.519 outputs, specs and price
Muse Spark 1.1 logo
Muse Spark 1.158 outputs, specs and price
Rival
How it worksPrivacyTerms
Explore all of Rival

Explore

  • Compare Models
  • All Models
  • Image Comparison
  • Audio Comparison
  • Image Generation
  • Best AI For...
  • Arena
  • API Pricing
  • Challenges

Discover

  • SubjectiveBench
  • Default Index
  • Research
  • Research downloads
  • Rival Kits
  • Find your AI taste
  • UI Glow-Up
  • VoiceLock
  • Cost Cutter
  • Agent skills
  • Benchmarks vs Vibes
  • Brief
  • Jailbreak
  • Model Updates
  • Provider Status
  • AI Creators

Connect

  • Methodology
  • Advertise
  • Partnerships
  • Privacy Policy
  • Terms
  • RSS Feed