Meta is offering a 10x discount on input ($0.10 vs. $1.25/Mtok) and 20x discount on output ($0.20 vs. $4.25/Mtok) if you opt in to let them train on your data.
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.
arjietoday at 8:33 PM
Somewhat surprised that Meta with all their resources couldn’t make a model that matches Composer on any frontier. All the Sparks are dominated by some other model everywhere along the frontier. Nothing fancy here since Llama defined the open model.
The use traces must be crucial to functionality which is why they’re keeping prices so low.
sarjanntoday at 8:33 PM
I do think some of features in their harness seem interesting (workers in separate worktrees at once), recovery from crashes seem interesting.
bradfatoday at 8:16 PM
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.
wxwtoday at 8:17 PM
Last I heard, everyone at Meta was using Claude Code.
Any insiders know how Muse Code is doing internally?
mchusmatoday at 7:50 PM
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.
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
IceWrecktoday at 8:20 PM
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.
ipsum2today at 7:34 PM
I wonder why they didn't compare with GPT-5.6-sol, only Terra?
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.
AtlanticThirdtoday at 8:28 PM
I wish they would add a ZDR endpoint on OpenRouter
Cappybara12today at 8:18 PM
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 ?
liviuxtoday at 8:00 PM
Does this muse code have any muse spark 1.2 usage included? Can't understand from the docs.
minimaxirtoday at 7:41 PM
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.
Bolwintoday at 7:43 PM
> 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?
kcbtoday at 7:50 PM
Open the weights.
fcourytoday at 8:01 PM
Interesting, it seems like their muse code is built upon Codex CLI?
king_crimsontoday at 8:15 PM
Why does every AI lab feel the need to build their own coding agent…? Don’t we have more than enough already?
qphe95today at 7:44 PM
Theres no actual evidence they didn't just distill Kimi K3
paulkrushtoday at 7:16 PM
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.
giancarlostorotoday at 8:09 PM
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.
esafaktoday at 7:58 PM
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.
Readeriumtoday at 8:21 PM
Lol worse than DeepSeek
rvztoday at 7:42 PM
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.