Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.2 vs Qwen3 32B

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 1.6× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.2's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 16 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.2 Meta

49.8

Rank #44 Confirmed

Qwen3 32B Alibaba (Qwen)

38.8

Rank #166 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 16 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen3 32B in 1 category; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Muse Spark 1.2 leads 50.4 to 19.6.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is LMCA: 48.4% for Muse Spark 1.2 and 17.3% for Qwen3 32B.
  • Qwen3 32B is cheaper at $0.70 / $2.80 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.
  • Qwen3 32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.2 and Qwen3 32B specifications
Muse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.838.8
Released2026-08-052025-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M131K
Max output131K16K
Input $ / M tokens$1.25$0.70
Output $ / M tokens$4.25$2.80
Results tracked2826

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), Qwen3 32B: 37.3 (#184)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
SciCode56.4%35.4%
LMArena Coding14971358
DeepSWE54.9%—
Aider Polyglot—40%
LMArena WebDev1532—
FrontierSWE12%—
WeirdML60.3%—

Agentic & Tool Use Qwen3 32B leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 29.5 (#77), Qwen3 32B: 32.3 (#58)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
APEX-Agents36.4%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard—48.7%
GDP.pdf16%—

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 50.4 (#32), Qwen3 32B: 19.6 (#233)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
CritPt17.7%0.3%
LMArena Hard Prompts14901335
DTBench94.7%67.5%
LMCA48.4%17.3%
Epoch Capabilities Index155.18138.51
SimpleBench74.5%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark—54.9%
NYT Connections (extended)79.2%—
Chess Puzzles—5%

Math Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 43.8 (#68), Qwen3 32B: 37.9 (#89)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-2025—66.9%
ProofBench43%—
LMArena Math—1399

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 53.9 (#49), Qwen3 32B: 40.0 (#112)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
LMArena Expert14851362
GPQA Diamond—65.7%
SimpleQA Verified60.3%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate—5.9%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 42.6 (#24), Qwen3 32B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 57.4 (#10), Qwen3 32B: 45.8 (#162)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
LMArena Non-English14791317
LMArena Chinese15191357
LMArena Russian14941311
LMArena German—1341

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 77.1 (#30), Qwen3 32B: 69.1 (#174)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
LMArena Instruction Following14661305

Long Context Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 45.4 (#35), Qwen3 32B: 43.7 (#83)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
LMArena Longer Query14831327
Fiction.LiveBench—74.2%

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.2 leads

Muse Spark 1.2: 72.6 (#14), Qwen3 32B: 53.1 (#158)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen3 32B
LMArena Text14861340
LMArena Creative Writing14441297
LMArena Multi-Turn15041331
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.2 better than Qwen3 32B?

Muse Spark 1.2 is the stronger model overall, scoring 49.8 to 38.8 on the Noometry Index. Qwen3 32B costs 1.6× 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 Qwen3 32B?

Qwen3 32B is cheaper. It lists at $0.70 per million input tokens and $2.80 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.2 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.

Is Muse Spark 1.2 or Qwen3 32B better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.2 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 48.6 versus 37.3 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 Qwen3 32B share?

16 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.2 has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen3 32B has 26.

Related comparisons

Go deeper