Granite 4.1 30B vs Muse Spark 1.1

At a Glance

Compare
Pricing and Limits
Context windowMaximum documented tokens131K1,000K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Sep 3, 2026View model evidence →

Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →

Available Benchmarks

All benchmark results →
No Protocol-Matched Benchmark Yet.Results appear here only when both models share the same benchmark version, metric, evaluation protocol, and evidence class.

Side-by-Side Facts

Fieldgranite-4.1-30bMuse Spark 1.1
DeveloperIBMMeta
FamilyGranite 4 1 30bMuse Spark
Modelgranite-4.1-30bMuse Spark 1.1
Versiongranite-4.1-30bMuse Spark 1.1
Lifecycleactivepreview
Released2026-04-292026-07-09
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesTextText, Image, Video, Audio
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131K1,000K
Total parameters28.9BUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableUnknownYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessUnknownUnknown
Capabilitieschat, generation, toolschat, computer-use, generation, reasoning, research, structured_outputs, tools

Granite 4.1 30B Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers0
Canonical IDibm-granite/granite-4.1-30b

Muse Spark 1.1 Capabilities

chatcomputer-usegenerationreasoningresearchstructured outputstools
Serving providers0
Canonical IDmeta-llama/muse-spark-1.1

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Granite 4.1 30B vs Muse Spark 1.1 FAQs

Is Granite 4.1 30B or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Granite 4.1 30B and Muse Spark 1.1, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Granite 4.1 30B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Neither model has a directly sourced input price in this comparison. Neither model has a directly sourced output price in this comparison.

Which has a larger context window, Granite 4.1 30B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Muse Spark 1.1 has the larger sourced context window. Granite 4.1 30B supports 131K and Muse Spark 1.1 supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Granite 4.1 30B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.

Can Granite 4.1 30B or Muse Spark 1.1 be self-hosted?+

Granite 4.1 30B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Granite 4.1 30B is open weight; Muse Spark 1.1 is not marked open weight.

Can Granite 4.1 30B and Muse Spark 1.1 understand images?+

Granite 4.1 30B is not documented with image input; Muse Spark 1.1 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Granite 4.1 30B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Granite 4.1 30B is — and Muse Spark 1.1 is —.

Do Granite 4.1 30B and Muse Spark 1.1 support reasoning and tool use?+

Granite 4.1 30B: tool calling. Muse Spark 1.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Granite 4.1 30B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Granite 4.1 30B has 0 sourced provider routes; Muse Spark 1.1 has 0, a tie.

Which offers better value, Granite 4.1 30B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.

Send Feedback