Muse Spark 1.3 (Max) vs Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Which is better for the money: Muse Spark 1.3 (Max) by Meta or Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B by Alibaba? Intelligence, total benchmark cost, and end-to-end time from Artificial Analysis & other sources, snapshot 2026-10-26.
Trade-off
Verdict
Depends on your budget
Muse Spark 1.3 (Max) scores 8.2 points higher (48.1 vs 39.9) but costs 1.5× as much to run the benchmark ($3905 vs $2632; both flagship class). Pick Muse Spark 1.3 (Max) when the extra intelligence is worth the premium, otherwise Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B.
| Metric | Muse Spark 1.3 (Max) | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | Difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence (higher is better) | 48.1 | 39.9 | −17.0% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 17.0% less intelligent |
| Total AA cost (lower is better) | $3,904.90 | $2,632.05 | −32.6% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 32.6% cheaper |
| End-to-end time (lower is better) | 59.16s | 64.84s | +9.6% Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is 9.6% slower |
| Price per 1M tokens (in / out) | $1.25 / $4.25 | $2.00 / $6.00 | |
| Input modalities | Text, Image, Video | Text |
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Muse Spark 1.3 (Max): 17.0% less intelligence, 32.6% less cost to run the AA benchmark, and 9.6% slower end-to-end.
Today's Pareto frontier
Against the frontier
- Muse Spark 1.3 (Max) is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Kimi K3.1 Pro scores 55.10 for $3117.
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is off the frontier: at the same or lower cost, Claude Opus 5.5 (High, Default Fallback) scores 53.60 for $2172.
Muse Spark 1.3 (Max)Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BToday'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-1-3/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b · Markdown: /api/v1/compare/muse-spark-1-3/qwen3-8-2-4t-a95b?format=md · llms.txt · agent skill