Noometry

Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Olmo 3.1 32b Think

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 15 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #43 Confirmed

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

37.3

Rank #191 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 15 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher in 8 categories and Olmo 3.1 32b Think 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 46.4.
  • Olmo 3.1 32b Think has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
ProviderMetaAllen Institute for AI (Ai2)
Noometry Index49.937.3
Released2026-04-08—
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked3615

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 Think: 37.1 (#186)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Coding14971292
DeepSWE53.3%—
LMArena WebDev1542—
SciCode58.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

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

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
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 Think: 24.1 (#151)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Hard Prompts14861272
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 Think: 33.6 (#170)

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

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 52.8 (#55), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 35.0 (#178)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Expert14801294
SimpleQA Verified57.8%—

Multimodal Not comparable

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

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

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 56.8 (#16), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.3 (#226)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Non-English14711210
LMArena Chinese15181241
LMArena French14941262
LMArena German14661260
LMArena Russian14821193
LMArena Spanish14711288
LMArena Japanese1445—
LMArena Korean1459—

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 76.8 (#36), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 65.8 (#213)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Instruction Following14571246

Long Context Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#55), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 38.6 (#190)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Longer Query14631272

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 73.6 (#11), Olmo 3.1 32b Think: 46.4 (#215)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Olmo 3.1 32b Think
LMArena Text14791271
LMArena Creative Writing14401226
LMArena Multi-Turn14841252
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1927—
EQ-Bench 41260—

Frequently asked questions

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

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 37.3 on the Noometry Index.

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

Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 50.8 versus 37.1 in the Noometry coding category.

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

15 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.1 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Olmo 3.1 32b Think has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper