Muse Spark 1.1vsQwen3.8-27B
Muse Spark 1.1 | Qwen3.8-27B | |
|---|---|---|
| Specifications | ||
Parameters | — | 27B |
Context window | — | 262k |
| Benchmarks | ||
Agentic coding SWE-Bench ProCan the AI fix real bugs in real software? It's handed actual problems from open-source projects and has to write code that genuinely solves them. Higher is better. | 61.5% | 61.7%Best |
Agentic coding DeepSWE 1.1Artificial Analysis' independent test of deep, agentic software-engineering work — the AI has to plan and carry out substantial coding tasks end to end. (Version 1.1 of the test.) Higher is better. | 53.3%Best | 42.2% |
Repo-level code generation NL2Repo-BenchTests whether the AI can turn a natural-language requirement into working code across an entire repository, not just produce a single function or patch. Higher is better. | — | 42.3% |
Software engineering QwenSWEBenchQwen's in-house coding benchmark for evaluating a model's ability to complete software-engineering work. Higher is better. | — | 79% |
Competitive coding LiveCodeBenchCoding problems published so recently the AI can't have seen them in training — a contamination-free test of raw programming skill. Higher is better. | — | 90.3% |
Agentic terminal coding Terminal-Bench 2.1Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 80%Best | 73% |
Multi-step tool use MCP AtlasCan the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | 88.1% | — |
Professional tool use JobBenchTests the AI on professional workplace tasks that require using real work tools — the kind of multi-step jobs an office worker handles. Higher is better. | 54.7%Best | 33.4% |
Long-horizon office work CoWorkBenchTests long-running office tasks across fields including computer science, finance, law, medicine, and other productivity work. Higher is better. | — | 70.7% |
Personal tool use Toolathlon-VerifiedTests how well the AI uses everyday personal tools and apps to get things done — a human-checked version of Toolathlon. Higher is better. | 75.6% | — |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · no toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects, written so you can't just look up the answer. “No tools” means the AI answers on its own. Higher is better. | — | 30.8% |
Multidisciplinary reasoning Humanity's Last Exam · with toolsHumanity's Last Exam — extremely hard expert questions across many subjects. “With tools” means the AI is allowed to search the web or run code while answering. Higher is better. | 62.1% | — |
Science GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions in biology, physics, and chemistry — hard enough that subject-matter PhDs score around 65%. Higher is better. | — | 89.2% |
Instruction following IFBenchTests whether the AI can follow detailed instructions and satisfy multiple constraints at once. Higher is better. | — | 79.5% |
Agentic computer use OSWorld-VerifiedCan the AI actually operate a computer — clicking, typing, and using real apps — to finish tasks on its own? Higher is better. | 80.8% | — |
Agentic computer use Agent's Last Exam · pass@1A hard set of desktop and operating-system tasks an AI agent has to finish by looking at the screen and working the machine itself. The score is the share it passes outright — partial credit does not count. Higher is better. | — | 20.4% |
Agentic computer use Agent's Last Exam · scoreThe graded score on the same desktop and operating-system tasks in Agent's Last Exam, giving partial credit for progress beyond the strict pass-or-fail result. Higher is better. | — | 42.9% |
Agentic financial analysis Finance Agent v2Tests the AI on real financial-analysis work, like digging through reports and making sound decisions. Higher is better. | 57.2% | — |
Agentic legal work Harvey's Legal Agent BenchmarkHarvey's test of whether an AI agent can complete real legal work — drafting and reviewing documents, working with spreadsheets and presentations, and navigating files the way a lawyer's assistant would. Higher is better. | 20% | — |
Tax questions TaxEval v2A set of real tax questions created by Vals AI — can the AI give accurate answers about tax rules and filings? Higher is better. | 79.72% | — |
Medical admin work MedScribeCan the AI support doctors with their administrative work, like notes and paperwork? Created by Vals AI. Higher is better. | 88.89% | — |
Chart reasoning CharXiv ReasoningCan the AI read and reason about complex charts and figures, not just text? Higher is better. | 88.4% | — |
Visual reasoning BabyVisionTests core visual reasoning — seeing and understanding images the way even young children can, which AIs often find surprisingly hard. Higher is better. | 76.3% | — |
Community preference Arena Elo (Text)Real people chat with two anonymous AIs side by side and vote for the answer they prefer. Votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai — it measures which AI people actually like, not test scores. Higher is better. | 1490 | — |
Community preference (code) Arena Elo (Code)Like the text arena, but people vote on which AI writes better code. The votes become a chess-style Elo rating on arena.ai. Higher is better. | 1540 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | Qwen |
| Release date | Jul 9 2026 | Aug 14 2026 |
| Access | Proprietary | Open Weight |
Which is better: Muse Spark 1.1 or Qwen3.8-27B?
Muse Spark 1.1 leads Qwen3.8-27B on 3 of the 4 benchmarks they both report (SWE-Bench Pro, DeepSWE 1.1, Terminal-Bench 2.1, JobBench). Muse Spark 1.1 shipped 36 days before Qwen3.8-27B, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Muse Spark 1.1 is proprietary, while Qwen3.8-27B is open weight.
On SWE-Bench Pro, Qwen3.8-27B leads at 61.7% vs Muse Spark 1.1 at 61.5%. On DeepSWE 1.1, Muse Spark 1.1 leads at 53.3% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 42.2%. On Terminal-Bench 2.1, Muse Spark 1.1 leads at 80% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 73%. On JobBench, Muse Spark 1.1 leads at 54.7% vs Qwen3.8-27B at 33.4%.
Frequently asked questions
Muse Spark 1.1 was released by Meta on Jul 9 2026.
Qwen3.8-27B was released by Qwen on Aug 14 2026.
Qwen3.8-27B leads on SWE-Bench Pro — Muse Spark 1.1 61.5% vs Qwen3.8-27B 61.7%.
Muse Spark 1.1 is a proprietary model released by Meta. Qwen3.8-27B is an open weight model released by Qwen.
Other comparisons
Muse Spark 1.1vsClaude Opus 5Qwen3.8-27BvsClaude Opus 5Muse Spark 1.1vsGPT-5.6-CyberQwen3.8-27BvsGPT-5.6-CyberMuse Spark 1.1vsGemini 3.7 FlashQwen3.8-27BvsGemini 3.7 FlashMuse Spark 1.1vsGrok 4.6Qwen3.8-27BvsGrok 4.6Muse Spark 1.1vsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Qwen3.8-27BvsDeepSeek-V4-Pro-0813Muse Spark 1.1vsMistral Medium 3.5Qwen3.8-27BvsMistral Medium 3.5