Model comparison
Llama 3.2 1B vs Muse Spark
Muse Spark is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.6 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.
Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.
MetaSummary
- They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Llama 3.2 1B scores higher in 0 categories and Muse Spark in 8 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
- The widest gap is in knowledge, where Muse Spark leads 65.7 to 7.2.
- The biggest single-benchmark swing is OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025: 0.6% for Llama 3.2 1B and 88.9% for Muse Spark.
- Llama 3.2 1B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.
Side by side
| Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark | |
|---|---|---|
| Provider | Meta | Meta |
| Noometry Index | 20.1 | 50.6 |
| Released | 2024-09-24 | 2026-04-08 |
| Weights | Open | Proprietary |
| Context window | 60K | — |
| Max output | 54K | — |
| Input $ / M tokens | $0.027 | — |
| Output $ / M tokens | $0.20 | — |
| Results tracked | 22 | 27 |
Sponsored placements are available on pages like this one. Advertise on Noometry
Category by category
Coding Muse Spark leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.1 (#338), Muse Spark: 46.2 (#69)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Coding | 1070 | 1481 |
| SciCode | — | 51.5% |
| BigCodeBench Instruct | 8.2% | — |
| BigCodeBench Complete | 11.3% | — |
Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: 14.6 (#150), Muse Spark: —
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard | 10.8% | — |
| BALROG | 6.6% | — |
Reasoning Muse Spark leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 16.2 (#308), Muse Spark: 35.9 (#67)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1044 | 1474 |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 101.99 | 152.04 |
| CritPt | — | 11.3% |
| Chess Puzzles | 0% | — |
Math Muse Spark leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 10.4 (#313), Muse Spark: 47.8 (#66)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025 | 0.6% | 88.9% |
| LMArena Math | 1086 | 1455 |
| ProofBench | — | 17% |
| FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set) | — | 39% |
| FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1) | — | 14.6% |
Knowledge Muse Spark leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 7.2 (#312), Muse Spark: 65.7 (#13)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 23.9% | 89.8% |
| LMArena Expert | 1007 | 1457 |
| Humanity's Last Exam | — | 40.6% |
Multimodal Not comparable
Llama 3.2 1B: —, Muse Spark: 43.4 (#24)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Vision | — | 1306 |
| LMArena Document | — | 1444 |
Multilingual Muse Spark leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 23.8 (#292), Muse Spark: 56.1 (#24)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Non-English | 973 | 1464 |
| LMArena Chinese | 959 | 1509 |
| LMArena German | 1014 | 1497 |
| LMArena Russian | 941 | 1466 |
| LMArena French | — | 1497 |
| LMArena Korean | — | 1459 |
| LMArena Spanish | — | 1472 |
Instruction Following Muse Spark leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 52.4 (#290), Muse Spark: 75.9 (#51)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1031 | 1442 |
Long Context Muse Spark leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 31.9 (#274), Muse Spark: 44.4 (#69)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Longer Query | 1050 | 1451 |
Writing & Preference Muse Spark leads
Llama 3.2 1B: 21.3 (#310), Muse Spark: 66.0 (#39)
| Benchmark | Llama 3.2 1B | Muse Spark |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text | 1055 | 1474 |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1033 | 1459 |
| LMArena Multi-Turn | 1030 | 1477 |
| EQ-Bench Creative Writing | 200 | — |
Frequently asked questions
Is Llama 3.2 1B better than Muse Spark?
Muse Spark is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.6 to 20.1 on the Noometry Index.
Is Llama 3.2 1B or Muse Spark better for coding?
Muse Spark scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.2 versus 21.1 in the Noometry coding category.
How many benchmarks do Llama 3.2 1B and Muse Spark share?
16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Llama 3.2 1B has 22 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark has 27.