Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#43); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #43 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) specifications
Muse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.9—
Released2026-04-082024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked366

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 50.8 (#38), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
DeepSWE53.3%—
LMArena WebDev1542—
SciCode58.8%—
LMArena Coding1497—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 33.9 (#45), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
τ²-bench Banking40.5%—
GBAEval7.9%—
GDP.pdf15%—
Vending-Bench 26,520—

Reasoning Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 45.9 (#41), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
Epoch Capabilities Index154.32112.93
NYT Connections (extended)84.9%—
CritPt15.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1486—
DTBench94.4%—
LMCA49.9%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
HellaSwag—76.8%
WinoGrande—72.9%

Math Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.0 (#67), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
ProofBench39%—
LMArena Math1477—
GSM8K—86.7%

Knowledge Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 52.8 (#55), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
SimpleQA Verified57.8%—
LMArena Expert1480—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.9%
MMLU—68%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 41.9 (#28), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Vision1292—
LMArena Document1465—

Multilingual Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 56.8 (#16), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Non-English1471—
LMArena Chinese1518—
LMArena French1494—
LMArena German1466—
LMArena Japanese1445—
LMArena Korean1459—
LMArena Russian1482—
LMArena Spanish1471—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 76.8 (#36), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Instruction Following1457—

Long Context Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#55), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Longer Query1463—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 73.6 (#11), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Text1479—
LMArena Creative Writing1440—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1927—
EQ-Bench 41260—
LMArena Multi-Turn1484—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.1 better than Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)?

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#43); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.1 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper