Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.2 vs Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)

Muse Spark 1.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.2 Meta

49.8

Rank #44 Confirmed

Summary

  • They share 1 benchmark with published results for both.
  • Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has downloadable open weights; the other is API-only.

Side by side

Muse Spark 1.2 and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) specifications
Muse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index49.8—
Released2026-08-052024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked286

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 48.6 (#49), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
DeepSWE54.9%—
LMArena WebDev1532—
FrontierSWE12%—
SciCode56.4%—
WeirdML60.3%—
LMArena Coding1497—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 29.5 (#77), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
APEX-Agents36.4%—
GDP.pdf16%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 50.4 (#32), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
Epoch Capabilities Index155.18112.93
SimpleBench74.5%—
NYT Connections (extended)79.2%—
CritPt17.7%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1490—
DTBench94.7%—
LMCA48.4%—
HellaSwag—76.8%
WinoGrande—72.9%

Math Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 43.8 (#68), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
ProofBench43%—
GSM8K—86.7%

Knowledge Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 53.9 (#49), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
SimpleQA Verified60.3%—
LMArena Expert1485—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.9%
MMLU—68%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 42.6 (#24), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Vision1304—

Multilingual Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 57.4 (#10), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Non-English1479—
LMArena Chinese1519—
LMArena Russian1494—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 77.1 (#30), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Instruction Following1466—

Long Context Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 45.4 (#35), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Longer Query1483—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.2: 72.6 (#14), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.2Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Text1486—
LMArena Creative Writing1444—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1840—
LMArena Multi-Turn1504—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.2 better than Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)?

Muse Spark 1.2 has enough public results to be ranked (#44); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.2 and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.2 has 28 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper