Qwen3.8 27B vs Muse Spark 1.1

At a Glance

Compare
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#30 of 4654.0 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 36.0–69.4UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#16 of 44$0.072 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#17 of 3854.8 score · 2/3 sources · provisional · missing ARC-AGI-2 · full-core range 45.8–62.5UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.20Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026Not reported
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$2.50Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026Not reported
Context windowMaximum documented tokens262K1,000K
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 →
BenchmarkQwen3.8-27BMuse Spark 1.1
LMArena Agent Arenaagent-2026-09-15-d25aabda0010 · outcome_score · leader-0.64100% of row best · score · Qwen 3.8 27B; 95% CI [-1.36495564, 0.07819043]; sessions 37257; observations 4349219; rank 29-2.9898% of row best · score · Muse Spark 1.1; 95% CI [-3.52464364, -2.43839720]; sessions 109338; observations 4434474; rank 33
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,439.2797% of row best · rating · qwen3.8-27b; 95% CI [1432.84410050, 1445.69542028]; votes 10697; rank 681,480.17100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.1; 95% CI [1475.34892554, 1484.99642998]; votes 27615; rank 15
LMArena Vision Arenavision-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,272.1298% of row best · rating · qwen3.8-27b; 95% CI [1262.21853873, 1282.01179703]; votes 4577; rank 351,294.16100% of row best · rating · muse-spark-1.1; 95% CI [1286.17018729, 1302.15601223]; votes 8447; rank 21
LiveBench2026-06-25 · overall · leader78.0299% of row best · percent · qwen3.8-27b · 28,740 output tokens / case78.57100% of row best · percent · muse-spark-1.1-xhigh · 13,652 output tokens / case
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above1 benchmark win3 benchmark winsOverall lead

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

FieldQwen3.8-27BMuse Spark 1.1
DeveloperQwenMeta
FamilyQwen3 8 27bMuse Spark
ModelQwen3.8-27BMuse Spark 1.1
VersionQwen3.8-27BMuse Spark 1.1
Lifecycleactivepreview
ReleasedUnknown2026-07-09
Knowledge cutoffUnknownUnknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Video, Audio
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window262K1,000K
Total parameters27.8BUnknown
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)Unknown
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, toolschat, computer-use, generation, reasoning, research, structured_outputs, tools

Qwen3.8 27B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningtools
Serving providers3
Canonical IDQwen/Qwen3.8-27B

Muse Spark 1.1 Capabilities

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

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Qwen3.8 27B vs Muse Spark 1.1 FAQs

Is Qwen3.8 27B or Muse Spark 1.1 better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Qwen3.8 27B and Muse Spark 1.1, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Only Qwen3.8 27B has a directly sourced input price: $0.20 per million tokens. Only Qwen3.8 27B has a directly sourced output price: $2.50 per million tokens.

Which has a larger context window, Qwen3.8 27B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Muse Spark 1.1 has the larger sourced context window. Qwen3.8 27B supports 262K and Muse Spark 1.1 supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Qwen3.8 27B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Muse Spark 1.1 leads the current overall benchmark count. The result uses 4 protocol-matched benchmarks from 2 publishers; it is not a universal quality score.

Can Qwen3.8 27B or Muse Spark 1.1 be self-hosted?+

Qwen3.8 27B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Qwen3.8 27B is open weight; Muse Spark 1.1 is not marked open weight.

Can Qwen3.8 27B and Muse Spark 1.1 understand images?+

Qwen3.8 27B is 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, Qwen3.8 27B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Qwen3.8 27B is 131K and Muse Spark 1.1 is —.

Do Qwen3.8 27B and Muse Spark 1.1 support reasoning and tool use?+

Qwen3.8 27B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Muse Spark 1.1: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Qwen3.8 27B or Muse Spark 1.1?+

Qwen3.8 27B has 3 sourced provider routes; Muse Spark 1.1 has 0, so Qwen3.8 27B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Qwen3.8 27B 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