GPT 6 Luna vs Muse Spark 1.3
Muse Spark 1.3 leads on quality in 1 of 2 pairings; the rest show no clear difference. 2 pairings; 24 merged changes in Stet-AI/stet. Compare the individual calls below to choose which setup to investigate.
What this comparison is
- 1 real repositoryStet-AI/stet, private; not public benchmark scores
- 24 merged changeseach run end to end by the coding agent from the repo as it was before the change
- Graded against the merged changeby the repo’s own tests and by judges comparing each patch with it
- Quality, cost and timea smaller sample than public benchmarks, but real agent work on a real codebase
Compare coding modelsLow vs high vs xhigh/max reasoning for coding agents
Recorded setup pairings
Each row is a separate recorded comparison. Scores are not pooled or averaged across effort settings. W/D/L means wins, draws and losses; undecided judgments remain undecided.
Stet score: A setup’s average chance of beating another setup on a task, from 0 to 100; 50 is even with the field.
| Setup pairing | Recorded quality call and record | Quality evidence | Cost per task | Agent time per task |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| GPT 6 Luna max vs Muse Spark 1.3 highGPT 6 Luna max · max reasoningMuse Spark 1.3 high · high reasoning22/24 tasks observed by both setups. | Muse Spark 1.3 high has a slight quality edge, 3–0 head to head with 18 tied and 3 undecided; Muse Spark 1.3 high leads on cost and agent time: 3.7× cheaper and 4.5× faster.Head to head, Muse Spark 1.3 high won 3, tied 18 and lost 0 against GPT 6 Luna max, with 3 undecided. | Slight edge 3–0 head to head, 18 tiedGPT 6 Luna max: 46.0 (95% range 40.4–51.6)Muse Spark 1.3 high: 51.9 (95% range 47.9–56.0) | GPT 6 Luna max: $0.37 Muse Spark 1.3 high: $0.10 | GPT 6 Luna max: 59.7 min Muse Spark 1.3 high: 13.2 min |
| GPT 6 Luna low vs Muse Spark 1.3 highGPT 6 Luna low · low reasoningMuse Spark 1.3 high · high reasoning22/24 tasks observed by both setups. | Muse Spark 1.3 high leads on quality: won 7, tied 13, lost 1, 3 undecided head to head; GPT 6 Luna low leads on cost and agent time: 1.9× cheaper and 1.9× faster.Head to head, Muse Spark 1.3 high won 7, tied 13 and lost 1 against GPT 6 Luna low, with 3 undecided.Not yet conclusive across all 136 comparisons on the board. | Clear lead 7–1 head to head, 13 tiedGPT 6 Luna low: 37.8 (95% range 27.8–47.7)Muse Spark 1.3 high: 51.9 (95% range 47.9–56.0) | GPT 6 Luna low: $0.05 Muse Spark 1.3 high: $0.10 | GPT 6 Luna low: 6.9 min Muse Spark 1.3 high: 13.2 min |
Questions about these results
- Which is better for coding, GPT 6 Luna or Muse Spark 1.3?
- Muse Spark 1.3 leads on quality in 1 of 2 pairings; the rest show no clear difference. 2 pairings; 24 merged changes in Stet-AI/stet. Compare the individual calls below to choose which setup to investigate.
- Where do these coding results come from?
- Both coding agents worked the same 24 merged changes from the private Stet-AI/stet repository, each in the real repo as it was before the change. The repo’s tests and judges graded every patch against the merged change; no public benchmark scores are used.
- Are reasoning settings combined into one model score?
- No. Each effort pairing keeps its own recorded quality call, head-to-head record, cost and agent time. Incompatible scores are never averaged.