Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct vs Muse Spark 1.3

At a Glance

Compare
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.10Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026Not reported
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.30Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026Not reported
Context windowMaximum documented tokens10,000KNot reported
Model facts checkedAug 28, 2026View model evidence →Sep 4, 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 →
BenchmarkLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructMuse Spark 1.3
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,279.2986% of row best · rating · llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct; 95% CI [1274.57681953, 1284.00026285]; votes 29740; rank 2591,489.74100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.3-max; 95% CI [1480.91456937, 1498.56660928]; votes 4723; rank 10
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,117.8085% of row best · rating · llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct; 95% CI [1108.35603674, 1127.24229078]; votes 6466; rank 1141,314.56100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.3-max; 95% CI [1299.74034111, 1329.38210317]; votes 1804; rank 8
ToneBench2026-09-11-10-task-4ef099199c9c · overall_score · unverified47.3257% of row best · points · Llama 4 Scout · 696 output tokens / case82.63100% of row best · points · Muse Spark 1.3 (thinking) · 6,301 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 benchmark winsNo overall winner2 benchmark winsNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructMuse Spark 1.3
DeveloperMetaMeta
FamilyLlama 4 Scout 17b 16e InstructMuse Spark
ModelLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructMuse Spark 1.3
VersionLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructMuse Spark 1.3
Lifecycleactivepreview
Released2025-04-052026-09-02
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Video
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window10,000KUnknown
Total parameters108.6BUnknown
Active parameters17BUnknown
LicenseotherUnknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Unknown
Capabilitieschat, generation, toolschat, computer-use, generation, reasoning, research, tools

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers4
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct

Muse Spark 1.3 Capabilities

chatcomputer-usegenerationreasoningresearchtools
Serving providers0
Canonical IDmeta-llama/muse-spark-1.3

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct vs Muse Spark 1.3 FAQs

Is Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Spark 1.3 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and Muse Spark 1.3, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Spark 1.3?+

Only Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has a directly sourced input price: $0.10 per million tokens. Only Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has a directly sourced output price: $0.30 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Spark 1.3?+

Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is 10,000K and Muse Spark 1.3 is —.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Spark 1.3?+

There is no overall benchmark winner: An overall winner requires at least two decisive benchmarks from at least two original publishers.

Can Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Spark 1.3 be self-hosted?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is open weight; Muse Spark 1.3 is not marked open weight.

Can Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and Muse Spark 1.3 understand images?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is documented with image input; Muse Spark 1.3 is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Spark 1.3?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is — and Muse Spark 1.3 is —.

Do Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and Muse Spark 1.3 support reasoning and tool use?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct: tool calling and image input. Muse Spark 1.3: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Spark 1.3?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has 4 sourced provider routes; Muse Spark 1.3 has 0, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Spark 1.3?+

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