Noometry

Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 Flash

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#43); Qwen3.8 Flash does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #43 Confirmed

Qwen3.8 Flash Alibaba (Qwen)

35.1

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher in 1 category and Qwen3.8 Flash in 0 categories; one gap is clear of the uncertainty.
  • Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper at $0.15 / $0.47 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.1.
  • Muse Spark 1.1 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 1M.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.935.1
Released2026-04-082026-08-26
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
Context window1.05M1M
Max output131K131K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.15
Output $ / M tokens$4.25$0.47
Results tracked361

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), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
DeepSWE53.3%—
LMArena WebDev1542—
SciCode58.8%—
LMArena Coding1497—

Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 33.9 (#45), Qwen3.8 Flash: 31.2

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
GDP.pdf15%16.6%
τ²-bench Banking40.5%—
GBAEval7.9%—
Vending-Bench 26,520—

Reasoning Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 45.9 (#41), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
NYT Connections (extended)84.9%—
CritPt15.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1486—
DTBench94.4%—
LMCA49.9%—
Surface Evolver Bench52.5%—
Epoch Capabilities Index154.32—

Math Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.0 (#67), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
ProofBench39%—
LMArena Math1477—

Knowledge Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 52.8 (#55), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
SimpleQA Verified57.8%—
LMArena Expert1480—

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 41.9 (#28), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Vision1292—
LMArena Document1465—

Multilingual Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 56.8 (#16), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
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), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Instruction Following1457—

Long Context Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#55), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
LMArena Longer Query1463—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 73.6 (#11), Qwen3.8 Flash: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 Flash
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 Qwen3.8 Flash?

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#43); Qwen3.8 Flash does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.1 or Qwen3.8 Flash?

Qwen3.8 Flash is cheaper. It lists at $0.15 per million input tokens and $0.47 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.1 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.1 does, with 1.05M tokens against 1M.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8 Flash share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.1 has 36 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3.8 Flash has 1.

Related comparisons

Go deeper