The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8-27B

Muse Spark 1.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 49.9 to 45.2.

Meta · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Muse Spark 1.1 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 49.9 to 45.2, ranking #17 overall.

The models split the 8 individual benchmarks reported for both models evenly.

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.

Based on current LLM Stats indexes, shared benchmarks, pricing, and model metadata for 2026.

Choose Muse Spark 1.1

  • overall performance matters — it scores 49.9 and ranks #17 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window

Choose Qwen3.8-27B

  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Aug 2026
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Muse Spark 1.1
Meta
Qwen3.8-27B
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
49.9
#17
45.2
#30
Reasoning
50.3
#13
44.8
#31
Coding
34.7
#29
31.6
#39
Agents
34.4
#20
30.4
#31
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
4 of 8
4 of 8
Input price
$1.25 / M
— / M
Output price
$4.25 / M
— / M
Context window
1,048,576
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

3 shared
Index
Muse Spark 1.1
Qwen3.8-27B
Vision
35.2#11
33.1#18
Tool use
31.5#8
22.7#42
Multimodal
33.7#13
36.9#6
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Muse Spark 1.1 · 26 for Qwen3.8-27B

8 shared

Muse Spark 1.1 outperforms in 4 benchmarks (DeepSWE 1.1, Humanity's Last Exam, Job Bench, Terminal-Bench 2.1), while Qwen3.8-27B is better at 4 benchmarks (BabyVision, CharXiv-R, OSWorld-Verified, SWE-Bench Pro).

Both models are evenly matched across the benchmarks.

Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Human preference

Blind head-to-head votes and playground preference scores

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Muse Spark 1.1 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3.8-27B's 262,144 tokens. Both models can generate responses up to 131,072 tokens.

Meta
Muse Spark 1.1
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3.8-27B
Input262,144 tokens
Output131,072 tokens
Mon Sep 07 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Both Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8-27B support multimodal inputs.

They are both capable of processing various types of data, offering versatility in application.

Muse Spark 1.1

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3.8-27B

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Muse Spark 1.1 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3.8-27B uses Apache 2.0.

License differences may affect how you can use these models in commercial or open-source projects.

Muse Spark 1.1

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3.8-27B

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Muse Spark 1.1 was released on 2026-07-09, while Qwen3.8-27B was released on 2026-08-14.

Qwen3.8-27B is 1 month newer than Muse Spark 1.1.

Muse Spark 1.1

Jul 9, 2026

2 months ago

Qwen3.8-27B

Aug 14, 2026

3 weeks ago

1mo newer

Knowledge Cutoff

When training data ends

Neither model specifies a knowledge cutoff date.

Unable to compare the recency of their training data.

No cutoff dates available

Provider Availability

Muse Spark 1.1 is available from Meta Model API. Qwen3.8-27B is available from FriendliAI.

Muse Spark 1.1

meta logo
Meta
Input Price:Input: $1.25/1MOutput Price:Output: $4.25/1M

Qwen3.8-27B

friendli logo
FriendliAI
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?Start an Issue discussion→

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8-27B side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Muse Spark 1.1
✓ Preferred
Qwen3.8-27B
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8-27B.

Which is better, Muse Spark 1.1 or Qwen3.8-27B?

Muse Spark 1.1 leads the LLM Stats Score 49.9 to 45.2. Muse Spark 1.1 is made by Meta and Qwen3.8-27B is made by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team. The best choice depends on your use case — compare their capability indexes, individual benchmarks, pricing, and limits above.

How does Muse Spark 1.1 compare to Qwen3.8-27B in benchmarks?

Muse Spark 1.1 scores CharXiv-R: 88.4%, MCP Atlas: 88.1%, OSWorld-Verified: 80.8%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 80.0%, BabyVision: 76.3%. Qwen3.8-27B scores MathVision: 94.6%, OmniDocBench 1.5: 91.1%, LiveCodeBench v6: 90.3%, CharXiv-R: 90.2%, GPQA: 89.2%.

What are the context window sizes for Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8-27B?

Muse Spark 1.1 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3.8-27B supports 262K tokens. A larger context window lets you process longer documents, conversations, or codebases in a single request.

What are the main differences between Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8-27B?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (49.9 vs 45.2), context window (1.0M vs 262K), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8-27B?

Muse Spark 1.1 is developed by Meta and Qwen3.8-27B is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons