Model comparison

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp vs Muse Spark 1.3

Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 44.3 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp costs 6.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Last verified . 29 shared benchmarks.

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp DeepSeek

44.3

Rank #78 Confirmed

Muse Spark 1.3 Meta

54.8

Rank #27 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 29 benchmarks with published results for both. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp scores higher in 2 categories and Muse Spark 1.3 in 7 categories; 9 gaps are clear of the uncertainty.
  • The widest gap is in reasoning, where Muse Spark 1.3 leads 54.0 to 22.1.
  • The biggest single-benchmark swing is ProofBench: 8% for DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and 58% for Muse Spark 1.3.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is cheaper at $0.26 / $0.38 per million input/output tokens, against $1.25 / $4.25 for Muse Spark 1.3.
  • Muse Spark 1.3 accepts more context: 1.05M tokens versus 164K.
  • DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and Muse Spark 1.3 specifications
DeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
ProviderDeepSeekMeta
Noometry Index44.354.8
Released2025-09-292026-09-02
WeightsOpenProprietary
Context window164K1.05M
Max output66K131K
Input $ / M tokens$0.26$1.25
Output $ / M tokens$0.38$4.25
Results tracked4937

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

Category by category

Coding Muse Spark 1.3 leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 46.5 (#65), Muse Spark 1.3: 56.6 (#21)

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
LMArena WebDev13621657
SciCode38.9%59.7%
LMArena Coding14541514
SWE-bench Verified (bash only)70%—
Aider Polyglot74.2%—
CursorBench—41.6%
SWE-bench Multilingual59%—
WeirdML39.5%—

Agentic & Tool Use Muse Spark 1.3 leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 32.7 (#59), Muse Spark 1.3: 38.6 (#30)

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
APEX-Agents21.3%57.8%
Terminal-Bench39.6%—
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard56.7%—
TheAgentCompany42.9%—
GDP.pdf—27.6%
Vending-Bench 21,034—

Reasoning Muse Spark 1.3 leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 22.1 (#208), Muse Spark 1.3: 54.0 (#27)

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
NYT Connections (extended)36.7%85.1%
CritPt2.9%26%
Chess Puzzles14%38%
LMArena Hard Prompts14341503
DTBench87.7%96.5%
LMCA29.1%53.9%
Epoch Capabilities Index146.27156.75
ARC-AGI-24%—
Kagi LLM Benchmark52.2%—
ARC-AGI-157%—
Thematic Generalization65%—
Mystery Game Puzzles—25%
Bench to the Future 3—0.14

Math Muse Spark 1.3 leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 41.7 (#87), Muse Spark 1.3: 73.1 (#21)

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202587.8%99.2%
ProofBench8%58%
LMArena Math14351494
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)—74.4%
FrontierMath Tier 4—46.3%
MathArena Final-Answer Competitions57.7%—
FrontierMath (Feb 2025 set)22.1%—
FrontierMath Tier 4 (v1)2.1%—

Knowledge DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 51.7 (#66), Muse Spark 1.3: 42.6 (#95)

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
LMArena Expert14361516
GPQA Diamond83.4%—
Vectara Hallucination Rate5.3%—

Multimodal Not comparable

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: —, Muse Spark 1.3: 43.7 (#22)

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
LMArena Vision—1309
LMArena Document—1471

Multilingual Muse Spark 1.3 leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 52.2 (#90), Muse Spark 1.3: 57.4 (#8)

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
LMArena Non-English14091481
LMArena Chinese14611529
LMArena French14331524
LMArena German14401515
LMArena Japanese13741474
LMArena Korean13711501
LMArena Russian14241490
LMArena Spanish14401490

Instruction Following Muse Spark 1.3 leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 74.5 (#93), Muse Spark 1.3: 77.5 (#22)

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
LMArena Instruction Following14131477

Long Context DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 47.6 (#16), Muse Spark 1.3: 45.6 (#32)

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
LMArena Longer Query14281488
Fiction.LiveBench83.3%—
CL-bench13.2%—
CL-bench Life9.5%—

Writing & Preference Muse Spark 1.3 leads

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp: 62.4 (#77), Muse Spark 1.3: 73.6 (#9)

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkDeepSeek-V3.2-ExpMuse Spark 1.3
LMArena Text14251490
LMArena Creative Writing14031455
EQ-Bench Creative Writing15151906
LMArena Multi-Turn14271482

Frequently asked questions

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp better than Muse Spark 1.3?

Muse Spark 1.3 is the stronger model overall, scoring 54.8 to 44.3 on the Noometry Index. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp costs 6.9× less per token, which makes it the better buy when Muse Spark 1.3's lead doesn't matter for your workload.

Which is cheaper, DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp or Muse Spark 1.3?

DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp is cheaper. It lists at $0.26 per million input tokens and $0.38 per million output tokens; Muse Spark 1.3 lists at $1.25 and $4.25.

Is DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp or Muse Spark 1.3 better for coding?

Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher on coding benchmarks: 56.6 versus 46.5 in the Noometry coding category.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.3 does, with 1.05M tokens against 164K.

How many benchmarks do DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp and Muse Spark 1.3 share?

29 benchmarks have published results for both models. DeepSeek-V3.2-Exp has 49 scored results on Noometry and Muse Spark 1.3 has 37.

Related comparisons

Go deeper