Model comparison

Muse Spark vs Qwen2.5-Coder-32B

Muse Spark is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.6 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Last verified . 13 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark Meta

50.6

Rank #46 Confirmed

Qwen2.5-Coder-32B Alibaba (Qwen)

33.4

Rank #245 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 13 benchmarks with published results for both. Muse Spark scores higher in 8 categories and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B in 0 categories; 8 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in knowledge, where Muse Spark leads 65.7 to 33.4.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B specifications
Muse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index50.633.4
Released2026-04-082024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window—33K
Max output—29K
Input $ / M tokens—$0.66
Output $ / M tokens—$1
Results tracked2731

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

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark leads

Muse Spark: 46.2 (#69), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 22.6 (#333)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Coding14811276
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)—9%
Aider Polyglot—16.4%
SciCode51.5%—
BigCodeBench Instruct—49%
LiveBench Coding—56.9%
BigCodeBench Complete—58%
HumanEval+—87.2%
MBPP+—77%

Reasoning Muse Spark leads

Muse Spark: 35.9 (#67), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 21.2 (#225)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Hard Prompts14741251
Epoch Capabilities Index152.04119.49
CritPt11.3%—
LiveBench Reasoning—42.1%
LiveBench Data Analysis—49.9%
HellaSwag—83%
LiveBench—46.2%
WinoGrande—80.8%

Math Muse Spark leads

Muse Spark: 47.8 (#66), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.3 (#204)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Math14551251
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202588.9%—
ProofBench17%—
LiveBench Math—46.6%
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)39%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)14.6%—
GSM8K—93%

Knowledge Muse Spark leads

Muse Spark: 65.7 (#13), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 33.4 (#203)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Expert14571221
GPQA Diamond89.8%—
Humanity's Last Exam40.6%—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—70.5%
MMLU—79.1%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark: 43.4 (#24), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Vision1306—
LMArena Document1444—

Multilingual Muse Spark leads

Muse Spark: 56.1 (#24), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 37.8 (#235)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Non-English14641205
LMArena Chinese15091222
LMArena Russian14661228
LMArena French1497—
LMArena German1497—
LMArena Korean1459—
LMArena Spanish1472—

Instruction Following Muse Spark leads

Muse Spark: 75.9 (#51), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 61.4 (#245)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Instruction Following14421223
LiveBench Instruction Following—58.7%

Long Context Muse Spark leads

Muse Spark: 44.4 (#69), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 38.0 (#208)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Longer Query14511251

Writing & Preference Muse Spark leads

Muse Spark: 66.0 (#39), Qwen2.5-Coder-32B: 41.6 (#240)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen2.5-Coder-32B
LMArena Text14741230
LMArena Creative Writing14591174
LMArena Multi-Turn14771222
LiveBench Language—23.3%

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark better than Qwen2.5-Coder-32B?

Muse Spark is the stronger model overall, scoring 50.6 to 33.4 on the Noometry Index.

Is Muse Spark or Qwen2.5-Coder-32B better for coding?

Muse Spark scores higher on coding benchmarks: 46.2 versus 22.6 in the Noometry coding category.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B share?

13 benchmarks have published results for both models. Muse Spark has 27 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder-32B has 31.

Related comparisons

Go deeper