Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen-14B

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 11 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #51 Confirmed

Qwen-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

31.4

Rank #275 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 11 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen-14B in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in writing & preference, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 73.4 to 27.6.
  • Qwen-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen-14B specifications
Muse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.931.4
Released2026-04-082023-09-24
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked3718

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: 51.3 (#40), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#288)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
LMArena Coding14981071
DeepSWE53.3%—
LMArena WebDev1542—
SciCode58.8%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 30.8 (#73), Qwen-14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
APEX-Agents31.8%—
τ²-bench Banking40.5%—
GBAEval7.9%—
GDP.pdf15%—
Vending-Bench 26,520—

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 47.1 (#44), Qwen-14B: 19.6 (#257)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts14861027
Epoch Capabilities Index154.21113.03
NYT Connections (extended)84.9%—
CritPt15.1%—
DTBench94.4%—
LMCA49.9%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
BIG-Bench Hard—55%
LAMBADA—71.1%
PIQA—79.9%

Math Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 45.5 (#76), Qwen-14B: 31.2 (#227)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
LMArena Math14831068
ProofBench39%—
GSM8K—61.3%

Knowledge Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 53.1 (#59), Qwen-14B: —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
SimpleQA Verified57.8%—
LMArena Expert1478—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—84.4%
BoolQ—86.2%
MMLU—66.3%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 42.6 (#29), Qwen-14B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
LMArena Vision1293—
LMArena Document1465—

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 56.7 (#17), Qwen-14B: 27.5 (#275)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
LMArena Non-English14721041
LMArena Chinese15181077
LMArena French1494—
LMArena German1466—
LMArena Japanese1451—
LMArena Korean1458—
LMArena Russian1483—
LMArena Spanish1464—

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 76.5 (#39), Qwen-14B: 52.4 (#289)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
LMArena Instruction Following14571031

Long Context Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#58), Qwen-14B: 31.3 (#280)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
LMArena Longer Query14621028

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 73.4 (#11), Qwen-14B: 27.6 (#299)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen-14B
LMArena Text14791051
LMArena Creative Writing14371028
LMArena Multi-Turn14851022
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1927—
EQ-Bench 41260—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.1 better than Qwen-14B?

Muse Spark 1.1 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.9 to 31.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Muse Spark 1.1 or Qwen-14B better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 51.3 versus 31.2 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen-14B share?

11 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.1 has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen-14B has 18.

Related comparisons

Go deeper