Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.7

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 4.7, side by side, on 11 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 4.7 · Wired into the Agent OS Grok Build tab (4.7 / 4.6 / 4.5 picker, OpenRouter fallback when the CLI is signed out) and benched on twenty skill-infused game builds, each played through its full gameplay arc on a Metal GPU before the vision judge scored the played frame.

Where Muse Spark 1.2 beat Grok 4.7

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.

Where Grok 4.7 beat Muse Spark 1.2

The tasks where I gave Grok 4.7 a higher 0–10 score on the same prompt — with the actual commentary from my source guides.

Strengths & weaknesses I logged

Pricing & context — the spec sheet

The verdict — which should you pick?

Across 11 scored shared tasks, the averages are essentially tied — Muse Spark 1.2 6.95 vs Grok 4.7 6.86. This isn't the comparison where one wins; it's the comparison where you pick based on context, pricing, and what you're actually trying to ship.

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 4.7 both into the Agent Operating System and dispatch each from the kanban by task type — generative-art visuals → Muse Spark 1.2, one-shot arcade, driving and shooter builds where the whole game has to arrive in a single file → Grok 4.7. That's the same setup I run for the 4,000+ founders inside the AI Profit Boardroom.

FAQ — Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.7

Which is better, Muse Spark 1.2 or Grok 4.7?

On Goldie Bench, Muse Spark 1.2 averages 6.95/10 across the shared tasks, with 0 gold, 3 silver, 4 bronze overall. Grok 4.7 averages 6.86/10, with 0 gold, 1 silver, 2 bronze. Grok 4.7 wins the head-to-head 7–4.

How much does Muse Spark 1.2 cost vs Grok 4.7?

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 4.7: xAI's September 2026 release, priced exactly like Grok 4.6: $2 per million input tokens and $6 per million output on the standard tier, $4 / $12 on the Fast tier (double the output speed). OpenRouter lists the same model at $1.60 / $4.80.

What's the context window for Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.7?

Muse Spark 1.2 has a 1,000,000 tokens context window. Grok 4.7 has a 500,000 tokens context window.

When should I pick Muse Spark 1.2 over Grok 4.7?

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 4.7 over Muse Spark 1.2?

Pick Grok 4.7 for: One-shot arcade, driving and shooter builds where the whole game has to arrive in a single file; High-volume agent work priced at half what the other frontier models charge; Grok Build inside the Agent OS: pick 4.7 in the tab and everything it writes lands in the workspace. The trade-off is the weaknesses we logged on the bench: 2 of 20 builds died on load or never moved when played — crypt: hud is not a function; voxelcraft: mesh.computeBoundingSphere is not a function file:///Users/j; Independent Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index v4.3.2 puts it at 46, seven points behind Claude Fable 5.1 and GPT-6 at 53; Terminal-Bench 4.0 is the weak spot xAI reports itself: 38.0% at launch.

How does Goldie Bench score Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.7?

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:

Full model pages: Muse Spark 1.2 · Grok 4.7 · back to the leaderboard