The AI arena is free today

Open Superagent

Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

Muse Spark 1.3 leads the LLM Stats Score 52.2 to 20.6. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is 4.2x cheaper per token.

Meta · Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team · Updated for 2026

Which is better?

Muse Spark 1.3 leads the overall LLM Stats Score 52.2 to 20.6, ranking #13 overall.

On price, Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is roughly 4.2x cheaper per token on a blended 3:1 input/output basis, which adds up quickly at production volume.

Muse Spark 1.3 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 1.3

  • overall performance matters — it scores 52.2 and ranks #13 on LLM Stats
  • your work emphasizes reasoning and coding — it leads those capability indexes
  • you process long inputs — it offers a 1,048,576 token context window
  • you want the most recent training data — it shipped Sep 2026

Choose Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

  • cost matters — it's about 4.2x cheaper per token
  • you need open weights you can self-host or fine-tune

At a glance

The differences that matter most.

Muse Spark 1.3
Meta
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Core performance indexes
LLM Stats Score
52.2
#13
20.6
#215
Reasoning
51.1
#11
20.7
#207
Coding
37.9
#24
11.9
#173
Agents
37.7
#14
5.2
#168
Cost, coverage & limits
Benchmark wins
—
—
Input price
$1.25 / M
$0.30 / M
Output price
$4.25 / M
$1.00 / M
Context window
1,048,576
262,144

Capability indexes

Additional strengths measured across groups of related public benchmarks

1 shared
Index
Muse Spark 1.3
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Tool use
31.2#7
12.3#122
Conservative TrueSkill rating · higher is betterHow scores work

Individual benchmarks

11 reported for Muse Spark 1.3 · 10 for Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

No common benchmarks found

Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B 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

Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct costs less

For input processing, Muse Spark 1.3 ($1.25/1M tokens) is 4.2x more expensive than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct ($0.30/1M tokens).

For output processing, Muse Spark 1.3 ($4.25/1M tokens) is 4.3x more expensive than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct ($1.00/1M tokens).

In conclusion, Muse Spark 1.3 is more expensive than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct.*

* Using a 3:1 ratio of input to output tokens

Lowest available price from all providers
Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com
Meta
Muse Spark 1.3
Input tokens$1.25
Output tokens$4.25
Best providerMeta
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Input tokens$0.30
Output tokens$1.00
Best providerDeepinfra
Notice missing or incorrect data?

Context Window

Maximum input and output token capacity

Muse Spark 1.3 accepts 1,048,576 input tokens compared to Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct's 262,144 tokens. Muse Spark 1.3 can generate longer responses up to 943,718 tokens, while Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is limited to 262,144 tokens.

Meta
Muse Spark 1.3
Input1,048,576 tokens
Output943,718 tokens
Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Input262,144 tokens
Output262,144 tokens
Sat Oct 24 2026 • llm-stats.com

Input capabilities

Documented input modalities across available providers

Muse Spark 1.3 supports multimodal inputs, whereas Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct does not.

Muse Spark 1.3 can handle both text and other forms of data like images, making it suitable for multimodal applications.

Muse Spark 1.3

Text
Images
Audio
Video

Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

Text
Images
Audio
Video

License

Usage and distribution terms

Muse Spark 1.3 is licensed under a proprietary license, while Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct uses Apache 2.0.

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

Muse Spark 1.3

Proprietary

Closed source

Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

Apache 2.0

Open weights

Release Timeline

When each model was launched

Muse Spark 1.3 was released on 2026-09-02, while Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct was released on 2025-01-31.

Muse Spark 1.3 is 19 months newer than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct.

Muse Spark 1.3

Sep 2, 2026

1 months ago

1.6yr newer
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

Jan 31, 2025

1.7 years ago

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 1.3 is available from Meta Model API. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is available from DeepInfra.

Muse Spark 1.3

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

Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct

deepinfra logo
Deepinfra
Input Price:Input: $0.30/1MOutput Price:Output: $1.00/1M
* Prices shown are per million tokens

Outputs Comparison

Notice missing or incorrect data?

Judge for yourself.

Run your own prompts against Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct side-by-side, then vote on the output you prefer.

Muse Spark 1.3
✓ Preferred
Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct
Open in Playground

FAQ

Common questions about Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct.

Which is better, Muse Spark 1.3 or Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

Muse Spark 1.3 leads the LLM Stats Score 52.2 to 20.6. Muse Spark 1.3 is made by Meta and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct 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 1.3 compare to Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct in benchmarks?

Muse Spark 1.3 scores MRCR v2 (8-needle): 98.5%, MRCR v2 (8-needle, 512K-1M): 98.1%, DeepSearchQA: 89.4%, Terminal-Bench 2.1: 88.8%, DeepSWE 1.1: 75.4%. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct scores TAU-bench Retail: 77.5%, SWE-Bench Verified: 69.6%, BFCL-v3: 68.7%, Aider-Polyglot: 61.8%, TAU-bench Airline: 60.0%.

Is Muse Spark 1.3 cheaper than Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is 4.2x cheaper for input tokens. Muse Spark 1.3 costs $1.25/M input and $4.25/M output via meta. Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct costs $0.30/M input and $1.00/M output via deepinfra.

What are the context window sizes for Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

Muse Spark 1.3 supports 1.0M tokens and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct 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 1.3 and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

Key differences include LLM Stats Score (52.2 vs 20.6), context window (1.0M vs 262K), input pricing ($1.25 vs $0.30/M), multimodal support (yes vs no), licensing (Proprietary vs Apache 2.0). See the full comparison above for benchmark-by-benchmark results.

Who makes Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct?

Muse Spark 1.3 is developed by Meta and Qwen3-Coder 480B A35B Instruct is developed by Alibaba Cloud / Qwen Team.

Related comparisons