BenchLeader
Menu
Best LLMsChoose a modelCoding plansLeaderboardsModelsBenchmarksProvidersReleases4

Muse Spark vs Qwen3.6 Max

Full profiles: Muse Spark (Meta) and Qwen3.6 Max (Alibaba): every benchmark, price and rank.

Updated · Data from 6 sources

As of 2 Nov 2026, Muse Spark and Qwen3.6 Max are neck and neck on quality (64.3 vs 62.4 on the BenchLeader Index, inside the ±4.5 margin). Choose Muse Spark for coding (65 vs 56), reasoning (68 vs 63), and human preference (68 vs 65); choose Qwen3.6 Max for agents & tools (72 vs 66), maths (65 vs 59), and long context (65 vs 64).

Key facts (as of 2 Nov 2026)

  • Muse Spark scores 64.3 on the BenchLeader Index and Qwen3.6 Max scores 62.4 (BenchLeader, 2 Nov 2026).
  • Qwen3.6 Max costs $2.92 per 1M tokens blended (list price, 2 Nov 2026).
  • Of the 22 benchmarks both models have, Muse Spark leads 14 (BenchLeader, 2 Nov 2026).
Muse Spark benchmarks Meta Qwen3.6 Max benchmarks max AlibabaAdd a third model

Which to pick for…

The pick's numbers come first. Category scores on the BenchLeader scale (50 is the average model, 15 points one standard deviation). High confidence means a lead of half a standard deviation or more; under one point is called either.

Use casePickWhyConfidence
CodingMuse Spark65 vs 56 category score; Arena Coding 1529 vs 1511High
Agents & tool useQwen3.6 Max72 vs 66 category score; Terminal-Bench Hard 43.9% vs 45.5%Medium
MathsQwen3.6 Max65 vs 59 category score; Arena Maths 1476 vs 1466Medium
ReasoningMuse Spark68 vs 63 category score; GPQA Diamond 89.8% vs 87.4%Medium
KnowledgeMuse Spark63 vs 60 category score; CorpFin 65.1% vs 66.5%Medium
Long documentsQwen3.6 Max65 vs 64 category score; AA-LCR v1.1 80.7% vs 78.0%Medium
Following instructionsMuse Spark77 vs 75 category score; IFBench 75.9% vs 76.6%Medium
Chat quality (human preference)Muse Spark68 vs 65 on Arena votesMedium
High volume on a budgetNeither flagshipA smaller model is usually the better fit: Cheapest good LLMs, Fastest LLMs–

Key differences

  • Muse Spark and Qwen3.6 Max (max) are neck and neck on quality (64.3 vs 62.4, within the ±4.5 margin).
  • Muse Spark is stronger in coding, human preference, instruction following, knowledge, multimodal, reasoning.
  • Qwen3.6 Max (max) is stronger in agents & tools, long context, maths.

At a glance

SpecMuse SparkQwen3.6 Max
DeveloperMetaAlibaba
Released8 Apr 202620 Apr 2026
Context window (tokens)262,144245,800
Compared atMuse SparkQwen3.6 Max (max)
Open weightsNoNo
Price in / out / cached input per 1M–$1.32 / $7.90 / $0.132

Category by category

Category scores on the BenchLeader scale: 50 is the average evaluated model, 15 points is one standard deviation. A gap under one point is called level.

CategoryMuse SparkQwen3.6 Max (max)Leader
Reasoning67.662.7Muse Spark
Coding64.956.3Muse Spark
Agents & tools66.172.1Qwen3.6 Max
Maths59.064.7Qwen3.6 Max
Knowledge62.960.0Muse Spark
Instruction following76.674.6Muse Spark
Human preference68.164.6Muse Spark
Multimodal64.2–not comparable
Long context63.865.2Qwen3.6 Max

On one chart

Each domain on the index's own scale, where 50 is an average model. Click a domain to see the benchmarks behind it. Pick up to 5 models from the list.

2550 avg75ReasoningCodingAgents & toolsMathsKnowledgeInstructionfollowingLong contextHumanpreferenceMuse Spark, Reasoning: 67.6Muse Spark, Coding: 64.9Muse Spark, Agents & tools: 66.1Muse Spark, Maths: 59.0Muse Spark, Knowledge: 62.9Muse Spark, Instruction following: 76.6Muse Spark, Long context: 63.8Muse Spark, Human preference: 68.1Qwen3.6 Max, Reasoning: 62.7Qwen3.6 Max, Coding: 56.3Qwen3.6 Max, Agents & tools: 72.1Qwen3.6 Max, Maths: 64.7Qwen3.6 Max, Knowledge: 60.0Qwen3.6 Max, Instruction following: 74.6Qwen3.6 Max, Long context: 65.2Qwen3.6 Max, Human preference: 64.6

Not drawn, measured for fewer than two of these models: Multimodal.

ModelIndex

Where sources disagree

Across the 22 benchmarks both have, Muse Spark leads 14, Qwen3.6 Max leads 8. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Spark ahead.

Overall indexMuse SparkQwen3.6 Max (max)Leader
BenchLeader Index64.362.4neck and neck
Arena Text14891460Muse Spark

Each publisher runs its own tasks, harnesses and effort settings, so their overall verdicts can differ; BenchLeader reconciles them on one scale. † measured at another effort setting of the same model (the publisher did not test the one compared here).

Price, speed and latency

List prices blended at three input tokens per output token. Per-task prices use the token counts on the methodology page. Cost, tokens and time per benchmark task are measured: Artificial Analysis’ averages over its whole Intelligence Index run.

MeasureMuse SparkQwen3.6 Max (max)
Blended price per 1M tokens–$2.96
Input / output per 1M– / –$1.32 / $7.90
Cached input per 1M–$0.132
Price per task: chat reply–$0.0029
Price per task: summarize a 30-page report–$0.021
Price per task: code edit–$0.020
Price per task: agentic coding session–$0.111
Price per task: structured extraction–$0.0042
Agentic coding session, input mostly cached–$0.057

Each model is compared at its best-ranked reasoning-effort setting. Muse Spark scores 64.3. Qwen3.6 Max (max) scores 62.4. Higher effort means more thinking before the answer: better scores, longer waits and more tokens billed. How reasoning effort changes scores and cost.

Every benchmark

60 benchmarks, grouped by category; each name links to the board and its leaders. † measured at another effort setting of the same model, shown for reference and not counted as a win.

MetricPublisherMuse SparkQwen3.6 Max (max)
BenchLeader IndexBenchLeader64.362.4
Agents & tools scoreBenchLeader66.172.1
Coding scoreBenchLeader64.956.3
Human preference scoreBenchLeader68.164.6
Instruction following scoreBenchLeader76.674.6
Knowledge scoreBenchLeader62.960.0
Long context scoreBenchLeader63.865.2
Maths scoreBenchLeader59.064.7
Multimodal scoreBenchLeader64.2–
Reasoning scoreBenchLeader67.662.7
Blended price $/MBenchLeader–$2.96
Context windowBenchLeader262,144 tokens245,800 tokens
Reasoning
GPQA DiamondEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub89.8%87.4%
Humanity's Last ExamScale AI / CAIS40.6%–
SimpleBenchSimpleBench–63.0%
Arena Hard PromptsArena (LMArena)15061482
GPQA Diamond (AA)Artificial Analysis88.4%88.8%
Humanity's Last Exam (AA)Artificial Analysis40.7%30.8%
GPQA Diamond (Vals)Vals AI89.7%–
CritPtArtificial Analysis11.3%3.7%
Mystery Game PuzzlesEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–19.0%†
LMCAEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–42.5%
DTBenchEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–87.2%
Coding
SWE-bench Verified (Epoch)Epoch AI Benchmarking Hub–76.7%
SciCodeSciCode51.5%–
Arena CodingArena (LMArena)15291511
Arena WebDevArena (LMArena)–1482
SWE-bench (Vals)Vals AI74.4%72.8%
SWE-Bench ProScale AI SEAL55.0%–
Vibe Code Bench v1.1Vals AI19.7%–
SWE-Bench Pro (private)Scale AI SEAL55.0%–
SWE Atlas: Codebase QnAScale AI SEAL24.2%–
SWE Atlas: Test WritingScale AI SEAL31.1%–
Terminal-Bench 2.1 (AA)Artificial Analysis62.2%–
Agents & tools
Terminal-Bench HardArtificial Analysis45.5%43.9%
τ²-Bench Telecom (AA)Artificial Analysis91.5%95.9%
MCP AtlasScale AI SEAL82.2%–
Show all 60 benchmarks
MetricPublisherMuse SparkQwen3.6 Max (max)
Agents & tools
Terminal-Bench 2.0 (Vals)Vals AI59.5%51.7%
Vending-Bench 2Andon Labs–4254.2
Maths
OTIS Mock AIMEEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub88.9%91.1%
ProofBenchVals AI17.0%–
AIME (Vals)Vals AI96.9%–
Arena MathsArena (LMArena)14661476
Knowledge
SimpleQA VerifiedEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub–52.0%
MMLU-ProVals AI87.3%–
LegalBenchVals AI84.2%–
CorpFinVals AI65.1%66.5%
TaxEvalVals AI77.7%–
PRBench FinanceScale AI SEAL52.4%–
PRBench LegalScale AI SEAL52.3%–
MultiNRCScale AI SEAL59.0%–
CaseLaw v2Vals AI63.1%47.9%
MedCodeVals AI51.3%–
MedScribeVals AI85.9%–
Instruction following
IFBenchArtificial Analysis75.9%76.6%
MultiChallengeScale AI SEAL75.5%–
TutorBenchScale AI SEAL68.5%–
Arena Instruction FollowingArena (LMArena)14641451
Human preference
Arena TextArena (LMArena)14891460
Arena Creative WritingArena (LMArena)14641437
Arena Multi-turnArena (LMArena)14931467
Arena Longer QueriesArena (LMArena)14761473
Multimodal
Arena VisionArena (LMArena)1306–
MMMU-ProArtificial Analysis80.5%–
MMMU-Pro (official)MMMU80.4%†–
MMMU-Pro (Vals)Vals AI87.4%–
Long context
AA-LCR v1.1Artificial Analysis78.0%80.7%
Arena DocumentArena (LMArena)1467–
Composite
Epoch Capabilities IndexEpoch AI Benchmarking Hub152.2149.4
AA Intelligence Index v4.3.2Artificial Analysis31.328.4
AA Progress Index v1Artificial Analysis289.1297.1
Safety & honesty
FORTRESSScale AI SEAL20.2%–

Data as of 2026-11-02. Best configuration of each model; every score links to its source on the model pages.

What changed

  • Muse Spark: 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • Qwen3.6 Max (max): 1 new result (AA Progress Index v1).
  • Qwen3.6 Max (max): BenchLeader Index 63.3 → 62.8.
  • Muse Spark: 1 new result (PRBench Legal).
  • Muse Spark: 1 new result (SWE Atlas: Codebase QnA).
  • Muse Spark: 2 new results (PRBench Legal, MultiNRC).
  • Muse Spark: BenchLeader Index 65.1 → 64.6.
  • Muse Spark: 1 new result (PRBench Finance).
  • Muse Spark: 1 new result (PRBench Finance).
  • Muse Spark: BenchLeader Index 64.6 → 65.1.

Rankings: Best LLM overall · Best LLM for agents · Best cheap LLMs

Muse Spark vs Qwen3.6 Max: questions

Is Muse Spark better than Qwen3.6 Max?
Muse Spark and Qwen3.6 Max (max) are neck and neck on quality (64.3 vs 62.4, within the ±4.5 margin). The BenchLeader Index combines every independent quality benchmark; the two are within the margin of error as of 2 Nov 2026, so check the category scores for your use.
Is Muse Spark or Qwen3.6 Max better for coding?
Muse Spark scores higher in coding (65 vs 56 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Arena Coding, the top shared coding benchmark, it is 1529 for Muse Spark against 1511 for Qwen3.6 Max.
Is Muse Spark or Qwen3.6 Max better for agents and tool use?
Qwen3.6 Max scores higher in agentic tasks (72 vs 66 on the category index, where 50 is average). On Terminal-Bench Hard, the top shared agents & tools benchmark, it is 45.5% for Muse Spark against 43.9% for Qwen3.6 Max.
Which is better for long documents?
Qwen3.6 Max scores higher on long-context benchmarks (65 vs 64). Muse Spark accepts more context: 262,144 against 245,800 tokens for Qwen3.6 Max.
Do independent benchmarks agree on Muse Spark vs Qwen3.6 Max?
Across the 22 benchmarks both have, Muse Spark leads 14, Qwen3.6 Max leads 8. Every overall index that rates both puts Muse Spark ahead.
More questions (1)
When was Qwen3.6 Max released?
Qwen3.6 Max was released on 20 Apr 2026.