Muse Spark 1.1 vs Kimi K2.5
At a Glance
| Compare |  Muse Spark 1.1Meta |  Kimi K2.5Moonshot AI |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $0.45Deepinfra ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $2.25Deepinfra ↗ · Aug 29, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 1,000K | 262K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → | Aug 28, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
| Benchmark | Muse Spark 1.1 | Kimi-K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Document Arenadocument-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,464.70100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.1; 95% CI [1455.86175356, 1473.53929177]; votes 4885; rank 18 | 1,430.1098% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.5-thinking; 95% CI [1423.37027866, 1436.81983378]; votes 21569; rank 34 |
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,480.17100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.1; 95% CI [1475.34892554, 1484.99642998]; votes 27615; rank 15 | 1,445.6498% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.5-thinking; 95% CI [1442.30343195, 1448.97544647]; votes 70513; rank 53 |
| LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,294.16100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.1; 95% CI [1286.17018729, 1302.15601223]; votes 8447; rank 21 | 1,266.9998% of row best · rating · kimi-k2.5-thinking; 95% CI [1261.13170482, 1272.84453452]; votes 26646; rank 39 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 3 benchmark winsNo overall winner | 0 benchmark winsNo overall winner |
Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Muse Spark 1.1 | Kimi-K2.5 |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Meta | Moonshot AI |
| Family | Muse Spark | Kimi K2 5 |
| Model | Muse Spark 1.1 | Kimi-K2.5 |
| Version | Muse Spark 1.1 | Kimi-K2.5 |
| Lifecycle | preview | active |
| Released | 2026-07-09 | 2026-01-27 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | Unknown |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video, Audio | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 1,000K | 262K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 1T |
| Active parameters | Unknown | 32B |
| License | Unknown | other |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Unknown | Deepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, computer-use, generation, reasoning, research, structured_outputs, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, tools |
Muse Spark 1.1 Capabilities
Kimi K2.5 Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Muse Spark 1.1Meta | vs |  GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Muse Spark 1.1Meta | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Muse Spark 1.1Meta | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Muse Spark 1.1Meta | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Muse Spark 1.1Meta | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Muse Spark 1.1Meta | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text, video |
Muse Spark 1.1Meta | vs | Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Muse Spark 1.1Meta | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Muse Spark 1.1Meta | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Muse Spark 1.1Meta | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Muse Spark 1.1Meta | cross-developer peersimage, text, video |
Muse Spark 1.1Meta | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Kimi K2.5 FAQs
Is Muse Spark 1.1 or Kimi K2.5 better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Muse Spark 1.1 and Kimi K2.5, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.1 or Kimi K2.5?+
Only Kimi K2.5 has a directly sourced input price: $0.45 per million tokens. Only Kimi K2.5 has a directly sourced output price: $2.25 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Muse Spark 1.1 or Kimi K2.5?+
Muse Spark 1.1 has the larger sourced context window. Muse Spark 1.1 supports 1,000K and Kimi K2.5 supports 262K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Muse Spark 1.1 or Kimi K2.5?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.
Can Muse Spark 1.1 or Kimi K2.5 be self-hosted?+
Kimi K2.5 is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Muse Spark 1.1 is not marked open weight; Kimi K2.5 is open weight.
Can Muse Spark 1.1 and Kimi K2.5 understand images?+
Muse Spark 1.1 is documented with image input; Kimi K2.5 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Muse Spark 1.1 or Kimi K2.5?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Muse Spark 1.1 is — and Kimi K2.5 is —.
Do Muse Spark 1.1 and Kimi K2.5 support reasoning and tool use?+
Muse Spark 1.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Kimi K2.5: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Muse Spark 1.1 or Kimi K2.5?+
Muse Spark 1.1 has 0 sourced provider routes; Kimi K2.5 has 3, so Kimi K2.5 has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Muse Spark 1.1 or Kimi K2.5?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.