Real head-to-head · same prompt, one shot
Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.6
Meta's coding reasoning model — co-trained with its own agent, 1M-token window. vs Frontier intelligence at half the frontier price.
Head-to-head verdict: Muse Spark 1.2 wins 14–5 with 1 tie.
What I tested — same prompt, two models
I run the same fixed prompt set through every new model the day it drops — same string, one shot, single HTML file out — and I score the result 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. Below is what came out when I gave the exact same prompts to Muse Spark 1.2 and Grok 4.6, side by side, on 20 shared tasks inside the Agent Operating System.
Both models were given identical prompts inside the Agent Operating System — no help, no iteration, no "best of N" tricks. I run each prompt once, save the HTML file the model produces, and score it 0–10 on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The scoring is mine. The verdicts below are pulled from my source comparison guides at agentos.guide where I publish every score and the reasoning behind it.
Muse Spark 1.2 · Cloud coder via OpenRouter; the Muse Code agent (one-command install) is its native harness.
Grok 4.6 · Benched on 16 skill-infused game builds, every one played through its full gameplay arc before scoring, then the broken ones were handed back to Grok 4.6 to repair itself.
Side-by-side on 50 shared tasks
Click any cell to play that model's actual one-shot attempt. Medals are derived from my 0–10 scores per task (highest = 🥇, second = 🥈, third = 🥉).
Task ↓
Muse Spark 1.2
Grok 4.6
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Game
— not attempted —
Other
— not attempted —
Where Muse Spark 1.2 beat Grok 4.6
The tasks where I gave Muse Spark 1.2 a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Voxelcraft
Game
Muse Spark 1.2 6.8
·
Grok 4.6 1.5
(+5.3)
What I saw: Renders a functional voxel world with block highlight, water, polished HUD (hearts, clock, hotbar with 9 block types) and clear controls; but the dark sky reads as broken/black at 05:23 AM 'DAY', the terrain looks blocky-flat with visible clipping, and it lacks the visual polish/…
Dogfight
Game
Muse Spark 1.2 8.4
·
Grok 4.6 4.8
(+3.6)
What I saw: Strong, polished chase-cam dogfight: crisp HUD with meters/radar/lock indicator, clean 3D plane and volumetric clouds, visible bandits and a lock-on target — very shippable. Slightly held back from top by generic sky-only environment and no visible combat action (tracers/effects)…
Flightsim
Game
Muse Spark 1.2 8.4
·
Grok 4.6 5.0
(+3.4)
· Polished flight HUD
What I saw: Strong render: clean 3D plane, textured runway with markings, terrain with trees, and a genuinely rich flight HUD (airspeed/altitude/VS tape, heading compass, throttle/hull, artificial horizon, gear/kills chips). Slightly generic terrain and low-detail plane keep it just below th…
Racing
Game
Muse Spark 1.2 8.4
·
Grok 4.6 5.4
(+3.0)
What I saw: Strong render with a polished third-person craft, procedural banked track, obstacles (rocks/trees), rivals, minimap and a rich cohesive HUD — clearly on-brief and shippable. Slightly held back by the flat repetitive scenery and gimmicky yellow overpass structures reading a touch …
Raycaster
Game
Muse Spark 1.2 8.4
·
Grok 4.6 5.5
(+2.9)
· polished maze FPS
What I saw: Strong render: textured brick maze walls, weapon model, clean fog, and a fully realized HUD with functional minimap showing hostiles and green exit beacon. Slightly generic corridor view and it's more a maze-FPS than pure Wolfenstein raycaster, keeping it just below the top mark.
Where Grok 4.6 beat Muse Spark 1.2
The tasks where I gave Grok 4.6 a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.
Arcade
Game
Grok 4.6 8.7
·
Muse Spark 1.2 6.5
(+2.2)
· 3D breakout cityscape
What I saw: Strong: a fully-rendered 3D breakout with atmospheric cityscape, glowing rails, detailed paddle craft, brick grid, active ball with particle trail, and polished HUD (core/velocity/lives/score/wave). Weak: perspective makes the brick field feel small and the 3D angle slightly comp…
Crypt
Game
Grok 4.6 6.0
·
Muse Spark 1.2 4.5
(+1.5)
What I saw: Torch-lit crypt with a warm falloff, a multi-part seeker character, tiled floor slabs, rubble and a room minimap; VITALS, TORCH and RELICS all present. Played 20s: movement and look both respond. But the camera clips hard into a wall on the mid-play frame, the geometry is untextu…
Outrun
Game
Grok 4.6 8.6
·
Muse Spark 1.2 7.4
(+1.2)
What I saw: Best one-shot of the Grok 4.6 run. Full synthwave stack: magenta laser grid, banked road with painted lines and neon kerbs, a multi-part car with a real headlight pool, light-gates, palm rows and a city skyline, plus barrier obstacles you actually dodge. Played 25s: SPEED climbed…
Doom
Game
Grok 4.6 6.4
·
Muse Spark 1.2 5.5
(+0.9)
What I saw: Re-scored after a real-GPU playtest. It LOOKS like a top-tier Doom - a red demon filling the screen, a shotgun sprite, a working minimap with enemy dots, and ammo that decrements on fire. But at a real 70fps each demon calls hurtPlayer(12) on a 0.18s cooldown, about 67 damage per…
Neonblaster
Game
Grok 4.6 8.0
·
Muse Spark 1.2 7.4
(+0.6)
What I saw: Space shooter with a multi-part player ship (glowing engine nacelles, wing pylons), a formation of pink-and-gold enemy fighters, an asteroid field, tracer streaks, an energy-ring gate and a working radar. Played 12s: HULL INTEGRITY dropped 100 to 064 because the enemies actually …
Strengths & weaknesses I logged
Muse Spark 1.2
Strengths
- Generative art & shader-feel scenes (fractal 8.7, aurora/galaxy/matrix/synthwave 8.6)
- Full app chrome one-shot (macOS-clone desktop 8.6)
- Fast one-shots — most builds landed in 45-80s
- 1M context for whole-repo work
Trade-offs
- 3D game worlds often render black/empty (dragonrealm 2.5, dogfight 3.0, doom 3.5)
- Open-world briefs collapse to HUD-only shells
- Reasoning tokens billed as output
Grok 4.6
Strengths
- Ties GPT-5.6 Sol at 61 on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, one point behind Claude Fable 5 Max
- Trained with agentic reinforcement learning for long-running agents, so it holds a spec across a 40KB single-file build
- Fixes its own broken builds: handed the exact runtime error, it repaired 4 of 4 failed games on the first retry
- Very strong arcade and shooter output - the synthwave racer and the Doom raycaster are top-tier one-shots
Trade-offs
- Flight models are its weak spot: both the flight sim and the dogfight shipped unflyable on the first pass
- Two of sixteen game builds died on a hard error (a duplicate identifier and a bad computeBoundingSphere call)
- Worlds are lit and composed but usually untextured, so terrain reads as flat coloured planes
Pricing & context — the spec sheet
| Spec | Muse Spark 1.2 | Grok 4.6 |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | Meta | xAI |
| Context window | 1,000,000 tokens | 500,000 tokens |
| Price | $1.25 in / $4.25 out per 1M | $2 in / $6 out per M tokens |
| Pricing detail | Meta's coding-optimized reasoning model, released 2026-08-05 beside the Muse Code agent. $0.15/1M cached input. Contributor tier is token-rate-limited in a rolling 5-hour window. Benched release-day via OpenRouter (meta/muse-spark-1.2, first-party listing); Opus 4.8 judged every real rendered poster, same rubric as the whole field. | xAI's August 2026 flagship. $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens on the standard tier (the Fast tier is double), which is roughly half what the other frontier models charge for the same Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score of 61. |
| Release | 2026-08-05 | 2026-08 |
| Bench coverage | 50/50 scored · avg 7.55/10 | 20/20 scored · avg 5.95/10 |
The verdict — which should you pick?
Across 20 scored shared tasks, Muse Spark 1.2 averaged 7.25/10, beating Grok 4.6's 5.95/10 by 1.30 points. Pick Muse Spark 1.2 when the build has to ship on the first prompt and you can afford the trade-offs in the comparison below.
If you only run one of these inside your stack, the head-to-head average above is the call. If you can run both, my honest play is to wire Muse Spark 1.2 and Grok 4.6 both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — generative-art visuals → Muse Spark 1.2, high-volume agent work where the per-token bill decides what you can afford to run → Grok 4.6. That's the same setup I run for the 4,000+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
FAQ — Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.6
Which is better, Muse Spark 1.2 or Grok 4.6?
On Goldie Bench, Muse Spark 1.2 averages 7.25/10 across the shared tasks, with 0 gold, 3 silver, 5 bronze overall. Grok 4.6 averages 5.95/10, with 1 gold, 0 silver, 0 bronze. Muse Spark 1.2 wins the head-to-head 14–5.
How much does Muse Spark 1.2 cost vs Grok 4.6?
Muse Spark 1.2: Meta's coding-optimized reasoning model, released 2026-08-05 beside the Muse Code agent. $0.15/1M cached input. Contributor tier is token-rate-limited in a rolling 5-hour window. Benched release-day via OpenRouter (meta/muse-spark-1.2, first-party listing); Opus 4.8 judged every real rendered poster, same rubric as the whole field. Grok 4.6: xAI's August 2026 flagship. $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output tokens on the standard tier (the Fast tier is double), which is roughly half what the other frontier models charge for the same Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index score of 61.
What's the context window for Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.6?
Muse Spark 1.2 has a 1,000,000 tokens context window. Grok 4.6 has a 500,000 tokens context window.
When should I pick Muse Spark 1.2 over Grok 4.6?
Pick Muse Spark 1.2 for: Generative-art visuals; Dashboard & app-shell one-shots; Long-context refactors (1M window). The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: 3D game worlds often render black/empty (dragonrealm 2.5, dogfight 3.0, doom 3.5); Open-world briefs collapse to HUD-only shells; Reasoning tokens billed as output.
When should I pick Grok 4.6 over Muse Spark 1.2?
Pick Grok 4.6 for: High-volume agent work where the per-token bill decides what you can afford to run; Arcade, shooter and driving builds in one shot; Self-repair loops - it is unusually good at fixing a build when you hand it the real error. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: Flight models are its weak spot: both the flight sim and the dogfight shipped unflyable on the first pass; Two of sixteen game builds died on a hard error (a duplicate identifier and a bad computeBoundingSphere call); Worlds are lit and composed but usually untextured, so terrain reads as flat coloured planes.
How does Goldie Bench score Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.6?
Every demo on this page was built by Julian Goldie inside the Agent Operating System — same fixed prompt for both models, one shot, single HTML file out. Each result gets a 0–10 score on whether it ran, how close it hit the brief, and how good it looked. The highest score on each task gets gold; second gets silver; third gets bronze. See methodology for full provenance.
Related comparisons
Other head-to-heads using the same scoring system:
Muse Spark 1.2 vs Fusion Grok 4.6 vs Fusion Muse Spark 1.2 vs Claude Opus 5 Grok 4.6 vs Claude Opus 5 Muse Spark 1.2 vs Hermes MoA Grok 4.6 vs Hermes MoA Muse Spark 1.2 vs GPT-5.6 Sol Grok 4.6 vs GPT-5.6 SolFull model pages: Muse Spark 1.2 · Grok 4.6 · back to the leaderboard
The same stack Julian uses
Run this stack yourself.
Every demo on this bench was built inside the Agent Operating System — one prompt, one shot, single HTML file out. The Agent OS, the prompts, the templates, the weekly walkthroughs and 4,000+ founders shipping with it every day all live inside the AI Profit Boardroom.
4,000+founders
258documented wins
38countries
$59/momonthly