whichllmmodel
Back to Dashboard

DeepSeek DeepSeek V4 Flash VS Meta Muse Spark 1.1

✍️ Analysis by:the whichllmmodel Editorial Team|📅 Updated: June 2026

Decision Recommendation

⚖️ Editorial Verdict: In our analysis, Muse Spark 1.1 is the premium intelligence choice, scoring 12.4% higher on coding benchmarks. However, this accuracy premium comes with a cost overhead: DeepSeek V4 Flash is 11.4x cheaper to run. If you are building high-volume, simple chatbots or processing massive amounts of text where budget is critical, DeepSeek V4 Flash offers excellent cost savings. For agentic reasoning, code refactoring, or complex logical tasks, the accuracy premium of Muse Spark 1.1 fully justifies the cost.
Was this recommendation helpful?
Model Specs

DeepSeek V4 Flash

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)
49.1%

excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases

Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)
80%

graduate-level science QA

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)11.4x cheaper
$0.17Input: $0.14 | Output: $0.28
Context Window
1M tokens
Model Specs

Muse Spark 1.1

Benchmarks & Scores

Coding (swe-bench-pro)Winner (+12.4%)
61.5%

excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases

Reasoning (gpqa-diamond)Winner (+11.2%)
91.16%

graduate-level science QA

Cost & Performance

Cost (per 1M tokens)
$2.00Input: $1.25 | Output: $4.25
Context WindowLarger
1.05M tokens

Frequently Asked Questions about DeepSeek V4 Flash vs Muse Spark 1.1 comparison

DeepSeek V4 Flash is cheaper than Muse Spark 1.1. DeepSeek V4 Flash has a blended cost of $0.17/1M tokens, which is about 11.4x cheaper than Muse Spark 1.1 at $2.00/1M tokens.

Muse Spark 1.1 is better for coding tasks on this benchmark. It scores 61.5% on swe-bench-pro (excellent at multi-file repositories, autonomous agents, and industrial codebases) compared to DeepSeek V4 Flash which scores 49.1%.