Noometry

Model comparison

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct vs Muse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct IBM

30.8

Rank #286 Confirmed

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #51 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark 1.1 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 73.4 to 29.6.
  • Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Granite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index30.849.9
Released—2026-04-08
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1.05M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.25
Output $ / M tokens—$4.25
Results tracked1337

Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 28.3 (#316), Muse Spark 1.1: 51.3 (#40)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Coding10901498
DeepSWE—53.3%
LMArena WebDev—1542
SciCode—58.8%
BigCodeBench Instruct20.5%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 30.8 (#73)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
APEX-Agents—31.8%
τ²-bench Banking—40.5%
GBAEval—7.9%
GDP.pdf—15%
Vending-Bench 2—6,520

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 20.5 (#235), Muse Spark 1.1: 47.1 (#44)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Hard Prompts10731486
NYT Connections (extended)—84.9%
CritPt—15.1%
DTBench—94.4%
LMCA—49.9%
Surface Evolver Bench—52.5%
Epoch Capabilities Index—154.21

Math Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.2 (#217), Muse Spark 1.1: 45.5 (#76)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Math11171483
ProofBench—39%

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.0 (#241), Muse Spark 1.1: 53.1 (#59)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Expert10641478
SimpleQA Verified—57.8%

Multimodal Not comparable

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: —, Muse Spark 1.1: 42.6 (#29)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Vision—1293
LMArena Document—1465

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 27.0 (#278), Muse Spark 1.1: 56.7 (#17)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Non-English10331472
LMArena Chinese10701518
LMArena Russian10451483
LMArena French—1494
LMArena German—1466
LMArena Japanese—1451
LMArena Korean—1458
LMArena Spanish—1464

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 53.9 (#284), Muse Spark 1.1: 76.5 (#39)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Instruction Following10561457

Long Context Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 32.5 (#268), Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#58)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Longer Query10701462

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Granite 3.0 2b Instruct: 29.6 (#292), Muse Spark 1.1: 73.4 (#11)

BenchmarkGranite 3.0 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Text10801479
LMArena Creative Writing10461437
LMArena Multi-Turn10531485
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1927
EQ-Bench 4—1260

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct better than Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 30.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.0 2b Instruct or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 28.3 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.0 2b Instruct and Muse Spark 1.1 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.0 2b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.1 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper