Model comparison
Llama 3.1-8B vs Muse Spark 1.2
Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-8B costs 35× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Last verified . 21 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 21 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.1-8B 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 knowledge, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 54.1 to 8.0.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is WeirdML: 1.7% for Llama 3.1-8B and 60.3% for Muse Spark 1.2.
- Llama 3.1-8B is cheaper at $0.05 / $0.08 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.2.
- Muse Spark 1.2 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 128K.
- Llama 3.1-8B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 23.0 | 50.3 |
| Released | 2024-07-23 | 2026-08-05 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 128K | 1.05M |
| Max output | 4K | 131K |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.05 | $1.25 |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.08 | $4.25 |
| Results tracked | 43 | 31 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 20.2 (#340), Muse Spark 1.2: 49.2 (#51)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| SciCode | 13.2% | 56.4% |
| WeirdML | 1.7% | 60.3% |
| LMArena Coding | 1195 | 1495 |
| DeepSWE | — | 54.9% |
| LMArena WebDev | — | 1533 |
| FrontierSWE | — | 12% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 32.8% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 40.5% | — |
| HumanEval+ | 62.8% | — |
| MBPP+ | 55.6% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 22.5 (#131), Muse Spark 1.2: 29.4 (#87)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| APEX-Agents | — | 36.4% |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 25.8% | — |
| BALROG | 15.1% | — |
| GDP.pdf | — | 16% |
Reasoning Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 14.9 (#321), Muse Spark 1.2: 51.3 (#34)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| CritPt | 0% | 17.7% |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1175 | 1486 |
| DTBench | 50.9% | 94.7% |
| LMCA | 5.4% | 48.4% |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 116.57 | 154.87 |
| SimpleBench | — | 74.5% |
| NYT Connections (extended) | — | 79.2% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
| PIQA | 81.2% | — |
Math Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 10.2 (#317), Muse Spark 1.2: 46.4 (#70)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Math | 1179 | 1471 |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 1.7% | — |
| ProofBench | — | 43% |
| Omni-MATH | 13.7% | — |
| MATH Level 5 | 22.9% | — |
| GSM8K | 82.4% | — |
Knowledge Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 8.0 (#307), Muse Spark 1.2: 54.1 (#53)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Expert | 1144 | 1480 |
| GPQA Diamond | 27% | — |
| SimpleQA Verified | — | 60.3% |
| MMLU-Pro | 40.6% | — |
| GPQA (HELM) | 24.7% | — |
| BoolQ | 82.8% | — |
| MMLU | 56.1% | — |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.1-8B: —, Muse Spark 1.2: 43.4 (#25)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1305 |
Multilingual Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 34.0 (#249), Muse Spark 1.2: 57.1 (#11)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 1148 | 1478 |
| LMArena Chinese | 1151 | 1511 |
| LMArena French | 1177 | 1513 |
| LMArena Russian | 1158 | 1487 |
| LMArena Spanish | 1169 | 1498 |
| LMArena German | 1144 | — |
| LMArena Japanese | 1061 | — |
| LMArena Korean | 1053 | — |
Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 58.9 (#258), Muse Spark 1.2: 76.7 (#36)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1159 | 1461 |
| IFEval | 74.3% | — |
Long Context Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 35.8 (#238), Muse Spark 1.2: 45.2 (#48)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1182 | 1475 |
Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.2 leads
Llama 3.1-8B: 29.7 (#290), Muse Spark 1.2: 72.3 (#14)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.1-8B | Muse Spark 1.2 |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1187 | 1482 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1154 | 1449 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 713 | 1840 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1172 | 1494 |
| WildBench | 68.7% | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.1-8B better than Muse Spark 1.2?
Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.3 to 23.0 on the Noometry Index. Llama 3.1-8B costs 35× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.
Which is cheaper, Llama 3.1-8B or Muse Spark 1.2?
Llama 3.1-8B is cheaper. It lists at $0.05 per million input tokens and $0.08 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.2 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.
Is Llama 3.1-8B or Muse Spark 1.2 better for coding?
Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 49.2 versus 20.2 in the Noometry coding category.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.2 does, with 1.05M tokens against 128K.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.1-8B and Muse Spark 1.2 share?
21 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.1-8B has 43 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.2 has 31.