Model comparison

Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)

Muse Spark 1.3 has enough public results to be ranked (#27); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

Last verified . 1 shared benchmarks.

Muse Spark 1.3 Meta

54.8

Rank #27 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 1.3 and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) specifications
Muse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
ProviderMetaAlibaba (Qwen)
Noometry Index54.8—
Released2026-09-022024-09-18
WeightsProprietaryOpen
Context window1.05M—
Max output131K—
Input $ / M tokens$1.25—
Output $ / M tokens$4.25—
Results tracked376

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

Category by category

Coding Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 56.6 (#21), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Coding benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
CursorBench41.6%—
LMArena WebDev1657—
SciCode59.7%—
LMArena Coding1514—

Agentic & Tool Use Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 38.6 (#30), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Agentic & Tool Use benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
APEX-Agents57.8%—
GDP.pdf27.6%—

Reasoning Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 54.0 (#27), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Reasoning benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
Epoch Capabilities Index156.75113.14
NYT Connections (extended)85.1%—
CritPt26%—
Chess Puzzles38%—
LMArena Hard Prompts1503—
Mystery Game Puzzles25%—
DTBench96.5%—
LMCA53.9%—
Bench to the Future 30.14—
HellaSwag—76.8%
WinoGrande—72.9%

Math Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 73.1 (#21), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Math benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
FrontierMath (Tiers 1-3)74.4%—
FrontierMath Tier 446.3%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024-202599.2%—
ProofBench58%—
LMArena Math1494—
GSM8K—86.7%

Knowledge Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 42.6 (#95), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Knowledge benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Expert1516—
ARC (AI2) Challenge—60.9%
MMLU—68%

Multimodal Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 43.7 (#22), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Multimodal benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Vision1309—
LMArena Document1471—

Multilingual Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 57.4 (#8), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Multilingual benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Non-English1481—
LMArena Chinese1529—
LMArena French1524—
LMArena German1515—
LMArena Japanese1474—
LMArena Korean1501—
LMArena Russian1490—
LMArena Spanish1490—

Instruction Following Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 77.5 (#22), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Instruction Following benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Instruction Following1477—

Long Context Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 45.6 (#32), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Long Context benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Longer Query1488—

Writing & Preference Not comparable

Muse Spark 1.3: 73.6 (#9), Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B): —

Writing & Preference benchmarks
BenchmarkMuse Spark 1.3Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)
LMArena Text1490—
LMArena Creative Writing1455—
EQ-Bench Creative Writing1906—
LMArena Multi-Turn1482—

Frequently asked questions

Is Muse Spark 1.3 better than Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B)?

Muse Spark 1.3 has enough public results to be ranked (#27); Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) does not yet, so treat this comparison as directional.

How many benchmarks do Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) share?

1 benchmark has published results for both models. Muse Spark 1.3 has 37 scored results on Noometry and Qwen2.5-Coder (1.5B) has 6.

Related comparisons

Go deeper