Muse Ember vs Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct
Muse Ember leads the LLM Stats Score 45.9 to 19.4. Muse Ember is 1.7x cheaper per token.
Meta · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026
Which is better?
Muse Ember leads the overall LLM Stats Score 45.9 to 19.4, ranking #47 overall.
On price, Muse Ember is roughly 1.7x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Muse Ember also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.
Choose Muse Ember
- overall performance matters — it scores 45.9 and ranks #47 on LLM Stats
- your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
- cost matters — it's about 1.7x cheaper per token
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Nov 2026
Choose Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
At a glance
The differences that matter most.
Capability indexes
Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks
Individual benchmarks
6 reported for Muse Ember · 24 for Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct
Muse Ember and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instructdon't have any common benchmark datasets to compare. They may have been evaluated on different testing suites.
Human preference
Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Muse Ember ($0.10/1M tokens) is 1.1x more expensive than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct ($0.09/1M tokens).
For output processing, Muse Ember ($0.50/1M tokens) is 2.2x cheaper than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct ($1.10/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct is more expensive than Muse Ember.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Muse Ember accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct's 262,144 tokens. Muse Ember can generate longer responses up to 524,288 tokens, while Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct is limited to 262,144 tokens.
Input capabilities
Documented input modalities across available providers
Muse Ember supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct does not.
Muse Ember can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.
Muse Ember
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct
License
Usage and distribution terms
Muse Ember is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct uses Apache 2.0.
License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.
Proprietary
Closed source
Apache 2.0
Open weights
Release Timeline
When each model was launched
Muse Ember was released on 2026-11-09, while Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct was released on 2025-09-10.
Muse Ember is 14 months newer than Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct.
Nov 9, 2026
3 days ago
1.2yr newerSep 10, 2025
1.2 years ago
Knowledge Cutoff
When training data ends
Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.
Unable to compare the recency of their training data.
Provider Availability
Muse Ember is available from Meta Model API. Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Novita.
Muse Ember
Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Muse Ember and Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
FAQ
Common questions about Muse Ember vs Qwen3-Next-80B-A3B-Instruct.