Noometry

Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen1.5-110B

Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 17 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.3 Meta

54.8

Rank #27 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-110B Alibaba (Qwen)

34.2

Rank #234 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 17 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-110B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Muse Spark 1.3 leads 73.1 to 33.7.
  • Qwen1.5-110B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index54.834.2
Released2026-09-022024-04-25
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked3720

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

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 56.6 (#21), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.0 (#264)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Coding15141184
CursorBench41.6%—
LMArena WebDev1657—
SciCode59.7%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—35%
BigCodeBench Complete—44.4%

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 38.6 (#30), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
APEX-Agents57.8%—
GDP.pdf27.6%—

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 54.0 (#27), Qwen1.5-110B: 22.7 (#189)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Hard Prompts15031168
NYT Connections (extended)85.1%—
CritPt26%—
Chess Puzzles38%—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
DTBench96.5%—
LMCA53.9%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.75—
ForecastBench—57.7

Math Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 73.1 (#21), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.7 (#201)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Math14941185
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)74.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 446.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%—
ProofBench58%—

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 42.6 (#95), Qwen1.5-110B: 31.2 (#219)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Expert15161144

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 43.7 (#22), Qwen1.5-110B: —

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Vision1309—
LMArena Document1471—

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 57.4 (#8), Qwen1.5-110B: 33.6 (#250)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Non-English14811142
LMArena Chinese15291206
LMArena French15241151
LMArena German15151123
LMArena Japanese14741074
LMArena Korean15011044
LMArena Russian14901118
LMArena Spanish14901142

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 77.5 (#22), Qwen1.5-110B: 60.3 (#252)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Instruction Following14771158

Long Context Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 45.6 (#32), Qwen1.5-110B: 35.1 (#242)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Longer Query14881157

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 73.6 (#9), Qwen1.5-110B: 38.0 (#255)

BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-110B
LMArena Text14901175
LMArena Creative Writing14551148
LMArena Multi-Turn14821160
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1906—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.3 better than Qwen1.5-110B?

Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 34.2 on the Noometry Index.

Is Muse Spark 1.3 or Qwen1.5-110B better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 56.6 versus 33.0 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen1.5-110B share?

17 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.3 has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-110B has 20.

Related comparisons

Go deeper