Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.2 vs Qwen2.5 7B Instruct

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 3 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.2 Meta

49.8

Rank #44 Confirmed

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct Alibaba (Qwen)

28.6

Rank #314 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 3 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher in 7 categories and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct in 0 categories; 7 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 53.9 to 17.0.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is DTBench: 94.7% for Muse Spark 1.2 and 47.7% for Qwen2.5 7B Instruct.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper at $0.17 / $0.70 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.2.
  • Muse Spark 1.2 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 131K.
  • Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.2 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct specifications
Muse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.828.6
Released2026-08-052024-09
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M131K
Max output131K8K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.17
Output $ / M tokens$4.25$0.70
Results tracked2815

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

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 48.6 (#49), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 35.9 (#204)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
DeepSWE54.9%—
LMArena WebDev1532—
FrontierSWE12%—
SciCode56.4%—
WeirdML60.3%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—37.6%
LMArena Coding1497—
BigCodeBench Complete—46.1%

Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 29.5 (#77), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 23.5 (#117)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
APEX-Agents36.4%—
BALROG—7.8%
GDP.pdf16%—

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 50.4 (#32), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 14.3 (#317)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
DTBench94.7%47.7%
LMCA48.4%6.4%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.18118.44
SimpleBench74.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.2%—
CritPt17.7%—
Chess Puzzles—0%
LMArena Hard Prompts1490—

Math Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 43.8 (#68), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 11.8 (#300)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—2.5%
ProofBench43%—
Omni-MATH—29.4%

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 53.9 (#49), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 17.0 (#281)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
GPQA Diamond—35.5%
SimpleQA Verified60.3%—
MMLU-Pro—53.9%
GPQA (HELM)—34.1%
LMArena Expert1485—
MMLU—72.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 42.6 (#24), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 57.4 (#10), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Non-English1479—
LMArena Chinese1519—
LMArena Russian1494—

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 77.1 (#30), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 63.4 (#226)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
IFEval—74.1%
LMArena Instruction Following1466—

Long Context Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 45.4 (#35), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Longer Query1483—

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 72.6 (#14), Qwen2.5 7B Instruct: 48.8 (#194)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5 7B Instruct
LMArena Text1486—
LMArena Creative Writing1444—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
WildBench—73.1%
LMArena Multi-Turn1504—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.2 better than Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.8 to 28.6 on the Noometry Index. Qwen2.5 7B Instruct costs 6.5× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.2 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct?

Qwen2.5 7B Instruct is cheaper. It lists at $0.17 per million input tokens and $0.70 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.2 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.

Is Muse Spark 1.2 or Qwen2.5 7B Instruct better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.6 versus 35.9 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.2 does, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.2 and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct share?

3 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.2 has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5 7B Instruct has 15.

Related comparisons

Go deeper