Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen1.5-14B

Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.4 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 14 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.3 Meta

54.4

Rank #27 Confirmed

Qwen1.5-14B Alibaba (Qwen)

32.1

Rank #250 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 14 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen1.5-14B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in math, where Muse Spark 1.3 leads 72.4 to 29.9.
  • Qwen1.5-14B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen1.5-14B specifications
Muse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index54.432.1
Released2026-09-022024-02-04
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked3417

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: 56.1 (#18), Qwen1.5-14B: 32.5 (#259)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Coding15161138
CursorBench41.6%—
LMArena WebDev1655—
SciCode59.7%—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 38.6 (#28), Qwen1.5-14B: —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
APEX-Agents57.8%—
GDP.pdf27.6%—

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 52.9 (#27), Qwen1.5-14B: 20.5 (#217)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Hard Prompts15031113
NYT Connections (extended)85.1%—
CritPt24.9%—
Chess Puzzles38%—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
DTBench96.5%—
LMCA53.9%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
Epoch Capabilities Index156.89—

Math Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 72.4 (#16), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.9 (#214)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Math14971125
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)74.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 446.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%—

Knowledge Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 42.0 (#92), Qwen1.5-14B: 29.3 (#230)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Expert15161094
MMLU—68.6%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 43.0 (#21), Qwen1.5-14B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Vision1310—
LMArena Document1471—

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 57.8 (#6), Qwen1.5-14B: 30.8 (#257)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Non-English14851095
LMArena Chinese15271147
LMArena French15341115
LMArena Russian14911046
LMArena Spanish14851085
LMArena German—1043
LMArena Japanese—1019
LMArena Korean1513—

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 77.8 (#14), Qwen1.5-14B: 57.1 (#266)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Instruction Following14811102

Long Context Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 45.7 (#29), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#252)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Longer Query14911113

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.3 leads

Muse Spark 1.3: 73.7 (#10), Qwen1.5-14B: 33.7 (#270)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen1.5-14B
LMArena Text14901128
LMArena Creative Writing14501091
LMArena Multi-Turn14861110
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1906—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.3 better than Qwen1.5-14B?

Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.4 to 32.1 on the Noometry Index.

Is Muse Spark 1.3 or Qwen1.5-14B better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 56.1 versus 32.5 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen1.5-14B share?

14 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.3 has 34 scored results on Noometry and Qwen1.5-14B has 17.

Related comparisons

Go deeper