Model comparison

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct vs Muse Spark 1.2

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct IBM

33.2

Rank #247 Confirmed

Muse Spark 1.2 Meta

50.3

Rank #48 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark 1.2 in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 72.3 to 34.1.
  • Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Muse Spark 1.2 specifications
Granite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index33.250.3
Released—2026-08-05
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1.05M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.25
Output $ / M tokens—$4.25
Results tracked1231

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

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.4 (#257), Muse Spark 1.2: 49.2 (#51)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Coding11491495
DeepSWE—54.9%
LMArena WebDev—1533
FrontierSWE—12%
SciCode—56.4%
WeirdML—60.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Muse Spark 1.2: 29.4 (#87)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
APEX-Agents—36.4%
GDP.pdf—16%

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 22.0 (#209), Muse Spark 1.2: 51.3 (#34)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Hard Prompts11381486
SimpleBench—74.5%
NYT Connections (extended)—79.2%
CritPt—17.7%
DTBench—94.7%
LMCA—48.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index—154.87

Math Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 33.1 (#206), Muse Spark 1.2: 46.4 (#70)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Math11591471
ProofBench—43%

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 30.8 (#224), Muse Spark 1.2: 54.1 (#53)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Expert11311480
SimpleQA Verified—60.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: —, Muse Spark 1.2: 43.4 (#25)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision—1305

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 29.1 (#269), Muse Spark 1.2: 57.1 (#11)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Non-English10681478
LMArena Chinese11391511
LMArena Russian10631487
LMArena French—1513
LMArena Spanish—1498

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 57.7 (#264), Muse Spark 1.2: 76.7 (#36)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Instruction Following11161461

Long Context Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 35.0 (#244), Muse Spark 1.2: 45.2 (#48)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Longer Query11551475

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 2b Instruct: 34.1 (#274), Muse Spark 1.2: 72.3 (#14)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkGranite 3.1 2b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text11271482
LMArena Creative Writing11161449
LMArena Multi-Turn10991494
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1840

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct better than Muse Spark 1.2?

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 33.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 2b Instruct or Muse Spark 1.2 better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.2 versus 33.4 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 2b Instruct and Muse Spark 1.2 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 2b Instruct has 12 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.2 has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper