Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) vs Qwen3 Coder Next
Which is better for the money: Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) by Meta or Qwen3 Coder Next by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-09-09.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) scores 29.7 points higher (39.8 vs 10.1) but costs 2.9× as much to run the benchmark ($1385 vs $476; premium vs mid-range cost classes). Pick Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3 Coder Next.
| Metric | Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) | Qwen3 Coder Next | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 39.8 | 10.1 | −74.6% Qwen3 Coder Next is 74.6% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $1,385.40 | $476.03 | −65.6% Qwen3 Coder Next is 65.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 24.55s | 5.52s | −77.5% Qwen3 Coder Next is 77.5% faster |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $4.25 | $0.35 / $1.20 | |
| Input modalities | Not reported | Not reported |
Qwen3 Coder Next vs Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh): 74.6% less intelligence, 65.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 77.5% faster end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
- Qwen3 Coder Next is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, GLM-5.3-Flash scores 41.90 for $280.
Muse Spark 1.2 (xhigh)Qwen3 Coder NextToday's Pareto frontierOpen-weights frontierEvery other model
Matchup
Compare something else
Agents:
Accept: text/markdown or ?format=md returns this page as Markdown. JSON: /api/v1/compare/muse-spark-1-2/qwen3-coder-next · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-spark-1-2/qwen3-coder-next?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill