Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Muse Spark 1.1 
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B Verdict
- Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B are level on quality (65.2 vs 65.2).
- Muse Spark 1.1 is stronger in coding, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, maths, multimodal.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is stronger in agents & tools, reasoning, composite, long context.
- Muse Spark 1.1 is 1.5× cheaper ($2.00 vs $3.00 per 1M blended).
- Muse Spark 1.1 streams 5.5× faster (210 vs 38 tokens per second).
| Metric | Muse Spark 1.1 | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B |
|---|---|---|
| BenchLeader Index | 65.2 | 65.2 |
| Agents & tools score | 62.6 | 78.3 |
| Coding score | 68.0 | – |
| Human preference score | 66.2 | – |
| Instruction following score | 77.8 | – |
| Knowledge score | 70.5 | 66.3 |
| Maths score | 62.7 | – |
| Multimodal score | 64.8 | – |
| Reasoning score | 69.2 | 80.5 |
| Composite score | – | 79.8 |
| Long context score | – | 66.6 |
| Blended price $/M | $2.00 | $3.00 |
| Output speed | 210 tok/s | 38 tok/s |
| Time to first answer | 2.9 s | 55.2 s |
| Context window | 1.0M | 984k |
| SimpleQA Verified | 57.8% | – |
| SciCode | 58.2% | – |
| APEX-Agents | 41.9% | – |
| ProofBench | 39.0% | – |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 154.6 | – |
| LMArena Text | 1493 | – |
| LMArena Hard Prompts | 1513 | – |
| LMArena Coding | 1531 | – |
| LMArena WebDev | 1542 | – |
| LMArena Vision | 1294 | – |
| LMArena Agent | -3 | – |
| AA Intelligence Index | – | 40.0 |
| AA-LCR | – | 80.3% |
| AA-Omniscience | – | 4.3 |
| GPQA Diamond (AA) | – | 93.5% |
| Humanity's Last Exam (AA) | – | 42.5% |
| SciCode (AA) | – | 54.0% |
| SWE-Bench Pro | 61.5% | – |
| MCP Atlas | 88.1% | – |
| MultiChallenge | 75.3% | – |
| PRBench Finance | 55.0% | – |
| PRBench Legal | 57.0% | – |
| MultiNRC | 65.6% | – |
| EQ-Bench 4 | 1260 | – |
| CritPt | – | 20.0% |
| GDPval (AA) | – | 56.4% |
| τ²-Bench Banking (AA) | – | 49.1% |
| FORTRESS | 12.4% | – |
| SWE-Bench Pro (private) | 51.5% | – |
| VTB | 44.8% | – |
| LMArena Maths | 1486 | – |
| LMArena Creative Writing | 1451 | – |
| LMArena Instruction Following | 1471 | – |
| LMArena Multi-turn | 1497 | – |
| LMArena Longer Queries | 1481 | – |
| LMArena Document | 1480 | – |
| DeepSWE | 53.3% | – |
| GBAEval | 7.9% | – |
| Vending-Bench 2 | 6520.5 | – |
| GDP.pdf | 15.0% | – |
Data as of 2026-09-19. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B: questions
- Is Muse Spark 1.1 better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B are level on quality (65.2 vs 65.2). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is ahead overall as of 2026-09-19, but check the category scores for your use.
- Is Muse Spark 1.1 better than Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B for agentic tasks?
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores higher in agentic tasks (78 vs 63 on the category index, where 50 is average).
- Which is cheaper, Muse Spark 1.1 or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper: $2.00 against $3.00 per million tokens, blended at three input tokens per output token.
- Which is faster, Muse Spark 1.1 or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B?
- Muse Spark 1.1 streams faster: 210 against 38 output tokens per second.
- Which has the larger context window?
- Muse Spark 1.1 accepts more context: 1.0M against 984k tokens.