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 1.3 Contributor
Updated Sep 2026

Claude Opus 5.5vsMuse Spark 1.3 Contributor

Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor is cheaper than Claude Opus 5.5 at $0.1/M vs $4/M input tokens.

Claude Opus 5.5 and Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor compared across 19 shared prompts
SpecClaude Opus 5.5Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor
Input price$4/M tokens$0.1/M tokens
Output price$20/M tokens$0.2/M tokens
Context window1.0M tokens1.0M tokens
WeightsClosedClosed
Free API (OpenRouter)NoNo
ReleasedSep 2026Sep 2026
Side by side

Same prompt, both answers

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

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 1.3 Contributor1,526 words
Shiretoko Dawn — Kombu-Cured Hokkaido Scallop, Fermented Porcini, Yuzu, Oscietra Caviar Butter-poached scallop, roasted porcini & toasted hay consommé, yuzu-buttermilk pearls, seaweed brown-butter, porcini soil, coral tuile Serves 4 as a tasting-course Autumn The Concept / Narrative On the Shiretoko Peninsula in…
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 1.3 Contributor804 words
This is an educational longevity optimization framework, not medical advice. Longevity biohacking is highly individual. Consult your physician, especially before fasting, keto, sauna/cold exposure, HIIT, or any new supplements - particularly if you have cardiovascular disease, diabetes, hypertension, kidney/liver…
Read the full answer

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 1.3 Contributor1,307 words
This architecture will not work as a Google Docs clone. It has correctness bugs that cause data loss and data leaks, plus several bottlenecks that get worse as you add servers. Here is a breakdown by severity, with concrete fixes and trade-offs.
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 1.3 Contributor2,344 words
If the transistor arrives in 1920 instead of 1947, you don't just get the iPhone 27 years early. You change WWII, you change who wins the peace, and you get the Information Age before television has even matured. Here’s the most plausible trace, with the caveat that invention is not production.
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 1.3 Contributor701 words
LedgerLift (LLLT) – Short Internal IC Memo Price $46 Mkt Cap $8.74B (190m shares) EV $7.34B (Net Cash $1.4B) FY25 Rev $820m, EBIT 18% 1. Recommendation: SHORT. 12-mo PT $28, range $17 (Bear) – $42 (Bull). Base DCF $27.9 (-39%), Bull $42.4 (-8%), Bear $17.3 (-62%). Even flawless Bull execution does not support $46.
Read the full answer

Adversarial Contract Review

Here is a contract for a software consulting engagement: --- SOFTWARE CONSULTING AGREEMENT This Agreement is entered into between TechCorp…

Claude Opus 5.54,420 words
Contractor-Side Review of the Software Consulting Agreement Overall assessment: This agreement is heavily one-sided. Nearly every clause shifts risk, cost, or control to the Contractor, and several provisions interact to create compounding exposure.
Read the full answer
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor1,634 words
This contract is extremely one-sided. Every clause contains language that could be exploited to get unpaid work, withhold pay, seize your own IP, or leave you with unlimited liability. Disclaimer: This is general legal information, not legal advice and not an attorney-client relationship.
Read the full answer
Our Verdict
Claude Opus 5.5
Claude Opus 5.5
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor

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

Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor costs 100x 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 1.3 Contributor
Input
$0.10
40× cheaper
Output
$0.20
100× cheaper

Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor is cheaper on both: 40× input, 100× 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 1.3 Contributor1 host
HostInOutContextUptime
Meta$0.10 in·$0.20 out·1M·99.9% 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 1.3 Contributor is developed by Meta AI. Claude Opus 5.5 has a 1.0M token context window vs Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor'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 1.3 Contributor 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 1.3 Contributor costs $0.1/M input tokens. Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor is $3.90/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 1.3 Contributor 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 1.3 Contributor logoQwen3.8 Max Prime logo
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor 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 1.3 Contributor logoQwen3.8 Omni Flash logo
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor 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 1.3 Contributor logoGPT-6 Luna Pro logo
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor 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 1.3 Contributor logoGPT-6 Luna logo
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor 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 1.3 Contributor logoMuse Glimmer 30B logo
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor vs Muse Glimmer 30BSame lab
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor logoMuse Spark 1.3 logo
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor vs Muse Spark 1.3Same lab
Claude Opus 5.5 logoSherlock Think Alpha logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Sherlock Think AlphaNew provider
Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Pro 3 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Pro 3Same size
Claude Opus 5.5 logoSolar Pro 4 logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Solar Pro 4Same size
Claude Opus 5.5 logoSonar Pro Search logo
Claude Opus 5.5 vs Sonar Pro SearchSame size

Model pages

Claude Opus 5.5 logo
Claude Opus 5.519 outputs, specs and price
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor logo
Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor58 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