Noometry

Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #43 Confirmed

Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct Allen Institute for AI (Ai2)

38.8

Rank #168 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 73.6 to 50.4.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
ProviderMetaAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index49.938.8
Released2026-04-08—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked3616

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

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 50.8 (#38), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 38.9 (#154)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Coding14971346
DeepSWE53.3%—
LMArena WebDev1542—
SciCode58.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 33.9 (#45), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
τ²-bench Banking40.5%—
GBAEval7.9%—
GDP.pdf15%—
Vending-Bench 26,520—

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 45.9 (#41), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 25.4 (#131)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Hard Prompts14861322
NYT Connections (extended)84.9%—
CritPt15.1%—
DTBench94.4%—
LMCA49.9%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.32—

Math Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.0 (#67), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 33.6 (#169)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Math14771305
ProofBench39%—

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 52.8 (#55), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 35.4 (#175)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Expert14801307
SimpleQA Verified57.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 41.9 (#28), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Vision1292—
LMArena Document1465—

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 56.8 (#16), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 42.8 (#185)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Non-English14711275
LMArena Chinese15181304
LMArena French14941328
LMArena German14661283
LMArena Korean14591206
LMArena Russian14821268
LMArena Spanish14711337
LMArena Japanese1445—

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 76.8 (#36), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 68.8 (#182)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Instruction Following14571298

Long Context Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#55), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 39.9 (#161)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Longer Query14631312

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 73.6 (#11), Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct: 50.4 (#179)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct
LMArena Text14791311
LMArena Creative Writing14401264
LMArena Multi-Turn14841309
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1927—
EQ-Bench 41260—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.1 better than Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct?

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index.

Is Muse Spark 1.1 or Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.8 versus 38.9 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.1 and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.1 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Instruct has 16.

Related comparisons

Go deeper