Model Comparison
Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B InstructWhich is better in 2026?
Muse Spark 1.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is 3.3x cheaper per token.
Verdict: Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct — which is better?
Muse Spark 1.1 (by Meta) and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct (by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team) are two of the AI models people compare most. Here is how they stack up on benchmarks, price and capabilities, and which one to pick in 2026.
Muse Spark 1.1 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (CharXiv-R), while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks. Muse Spark 1.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
On price, Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is roughly 3.3x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.
Muse Spark 1.1 also accepts a larger context window (1,048,576 input tokens), making it the stronger choice for long documents and large codebases.
Choose Muse Spark 1.1 if…
- you want the strongest raw capability — it leads on 1 of 1 shared benchmarks
- you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
- you want the most recent training data — it shipped Jul 2026
Choose Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct if…
- cost matters — it's about 3.3x cheaper per token
- you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune
Performance Benchmarks
Comparative analysis across standard metrics
Muse Spark 1.1 outperforms in 1 benchmarks (CharXiv-R), while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is better at 0 benchmarks.
Muse Spark 1.1 significantly outperforms across most benchmarks.
Arena Performance
Human preference votes
Pricing Analysis
Price comparison per million tokens
For input processing, Muse Spark 1.1 ($1.25/1M tokens) is 4.2x more expensive than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct ($0.30/1M tokens).
For output processing, Muse Spark 1.1 ($4.25/1M tokens) is 2.9x more expensive than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct ($1.49/1M tokens).
In conclusion, Muse Spark 1.1 is more expensive than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.*
* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens
Context Window
Maximum input and output token capacity
Muse Spark 1.1 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct's 262,144 tokens. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct can generate longer responses up to 262,144 tokens, while Muse Spark 1.1 is limited to 131,072 tokens.
Input Capabilities
Supported data types and modalities
Both Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct support multimodal inputs.
They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.
Muse Spark 1.1
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
License
Usage and distribution terms
Muse Spark 1.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B 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 Spark 1.1 was released on 2026-07-09, while Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct was released on 2025-09-22.
Muse Spark 1.1 is 10 months newer than Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.
Jul 9, 2026
1 weeks ago
9mo newerSep 22, 2025
10 months 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 Spark 1.1 is available from Meta Model API. Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct is available from DeepInfra, Novita.
Muse Spark 1.1
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
Outputs Comparison
Key Takeaways
Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct
View detailsAlibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Detailed Comparison
Interactive Arena
Judge for yourself.
Run your own prompts against Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.
| Feature | | |
|---|
FAQ
Common questions about Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3 VL 235B A22B Instruct.