Noometry

Model comparison

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct vs Muse Spark 1.2

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 12 shared benchmarks.

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct IBM

32.4

Rank #258 Confirmed

Muse Spark 1.2 Meta

50.3

Rank #48 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 12 benchmarks with published results for both. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark 1.2 in 9 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 72.3 to 35.5.
  • Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Granite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
ProviderIBMMeta
Noometry Index32.450.3
Released—2026-08-05
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window—1.05M
Max output—131K
Input $ / M tokens—$1.25
Output $ / M tokens—$4.25
Results tracked1331

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

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 34.5 (#233), Muse Spark 1.2: 49.2 (#51)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Coding11861495
DeepSWE—54.9%
LMArena WebDev—1533
FrontierSWE—12%
SciCode—56.4%
WeirdML—60.3%

Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 24.1 (#120), Muse Spark 1.2: 29.4 (#87)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
APEX-Agents—36.4%
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard27.1%—
GDP.pdf—16%

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 22.1 (#207), Muse Spark 1.2: 51.3 (#34)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Hard Prompts11451486
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 8b Instruct: 33.0 (#209), Muse Spark 1.2: 46.4 (#70)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Math11521471
ProofBench—43%

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 31.1 (#220), Muse Spark 1.2: 54.1 (#53)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Expert11421480
SimpleQA Verified—60.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: —, Muse Spark 1.2: 43.4 (#25)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Vision—1305

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 30.9 (#260), Muse Spark 1.2: 57.1 (#11)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Non-English10991478
LMArena Chinese11451511
LMArena Russian10921487
LMArena French—1513
LMArena Spanish—1498

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 58.6 (#259), Muse Spark 1.2: 76.7 (#36)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Instruction Following11311461

Long Context Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.2 (#241), Muse Spark 1.2: 45.2 (#48)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Longer Query11621475

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Granite 3.1 8b Instruct: 35.5 (#266), Muse Spark 1.2: 72.3 (#14)

BenchmarkGranite 3.1 8b InstructMuse Spark 1.2
LMArena Text11501482
LMArena Creative Writing11291449
LMArena Multi-Turn11081494
EQ-Bench Creative Writing—1840

Frequently asked questions

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct better than Muse Spark 1.2?

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 32.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Granite 3.1 8b Instruct or Muse Spark 1.2 better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.2 versus 34.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Granite 3.1 8b Instruct and Muse Spark 1.2 share?

12 benchmarks have published results for both models. Granite 3.1 8b Instruct has 13 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.2 has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper