Noometry

Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.1 vs WizardLM-2 8x22B

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#43); WizardLM-2 8x22B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 0 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.1 Meta

49.9

Rank #43 Confirmed

WizardLM-2 8x22B Microsoft

30.7

Unranked Sparse

Summary

  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 52.8 to 23.3.
  • WizardLM-2 8x22B is cheaper at $0.62 / $0.62 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 66K.
  • WizardLM-2 8x22B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
ProviderMetaMicrosoft
Noometry Index49.930.7
Released2026-04-082024-04-15
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M66K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.62
Output $ / M tokens$4.25$0.62
Results tracked362

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), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
DeepSWE53.3%—
LMArena WebDev1542—
SciCode58.8%—
LMArena Coding1497—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 33.9 (#45), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
τ²-bench Banking40.5%—
GBAEval7.9%—
GDP.pdf15%—
Vending-Bench 26,520—

Reasoning Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 45.9 (#41), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
NYT Connections (extended)84.9%—
CritPt15.1%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1486—
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), WizardLM-2 8x22B: 26.8

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
ProofBench39%—
LMArena Math1477—
MATH Level 5—25.7%

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.1 leads

Muse Spark 1.1: 52.8 (#55), WizardLM-2 8x22B: 23.3

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
GPQA Diamond—43.4%
SimpleQA Verified57.8%—
LMArena Expert1480—

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 41.9 (#28), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
LMArena Vision1292—
LMArena Document1465—

Multilingual Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 56.8 (#16), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
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), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
LMArena Instruction Following1457—

Long Context Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 44.8 (#55), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
LMArena Longer Query1463—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.1: 73.6 (#11), WizardLM-2 8x22B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.1WizardLM-2 8x22B
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 WizardLM-2 8x22B?

Muse Spark 1.1 has enough public results to be ranked (#43); WizardLM-2 8x22B does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.1 or WizardLM-2 8x22B?

WizardLM-2 8x22B is cheaper. It lists at $0.62 per million input tokens and $0.62 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 66K.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.1 and WizardLM-2 8x22B share?

0 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.1 has 36 scored results on Noometry and WizardLM-2 8x22B has 2.

Related comparisons

Go deeper