Compare AI models
| Specifications | ||
ParametersA rough measure of how big the model is. More parameters usually means more capable and more expensive to run, though it is a poor guide on its own — a smaller, newer model often beats a larger, older one. | 816B | 32B |
Context windowHow much text the model can hold in mind at once — your question, any documents you attach, the conversation so far, and its own reply. Go past it and the earliest part falls out of view. | 1M | 128k |
| API pricingUSD per 1M tokens · lower wins | ||
Cheapest inputLowest input rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. The cheapest endpoint may run a quantised build or a shorter context — see "Available from" on the model page. | — | $0.66Cloudflare |
Cheapest outputLowest output rate across every provider on OpenRouter, the lab included. May come from a different provider than the cheapest input. | — | $1.00Cloudflare |
| — | $182Cloudflare | |
| These models have no shared benchmark scores. | ||
DeepSWE 1.1Agentic coding — Artificial 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. | 60% | — |
Terminal-Bench 2.1Agentic terminal coding — Can the AI work in a command-line terminal — running commands and finishing technical setup tasks the way a developer would? Higher is better. | 76.4% | — |
MCP AtlasMulti-step tool use — Can the AI chain together many tools and steps to complete one bigger task, rather than doing just a single thing? Higher is better. | 89.2% | — |
JobBenchProfessional tool use — Tests 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. | 61.8% | — |
GDPval-AA v2Knowledge work — economically valuable knowledge work (v2, re-based Elo) | 1401 | — |
| Overview | ||
| Company | Meta | Qwen |
| Release date | Oct 15 2026 | Nov 12 2024 |
| Access | Open Weight | Open Weight |
| Model details | View model | View model |
Other comparisons
Muse Spark OpenvsClaude Haiku 5.5Qwen2.5-CodervsClaude Haiku 5.5Muse Spark OpenvsGPT-6.1 SolQwen2.5-CodervsGPT-6.1 SolMuse Spark OpenvsGemini 4 ArgonQwen2.5-CodervsGemini 4 ArgonMuse Spark OpenvsGrok 4.7Qwen2.5-CodervsGrok 4.7Muse Spark OpenvsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashQwen2.5-CodervsDeepSeek-V4.1-FlashMuse Spark OpenvsMistral Large 4Qwen2.5-CodervsMistral Large 4Frequently asked questions
Muse Spark Open and Qwen2.5-Coder don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks, so there's no direct head-to-head comparison. Qwen2.5-Coder shipped 702 days before Muse Spark Open, so benchmark comparisons should account for the intervening progress.
Muse Spark Open has 816B parameters, while Qwen2.5-Coder has 32B. Context windows are 1M (Muse Spark Open) vs 128k (Qwen2.5-Coder).
Direct benchmark comparisons are unavailable — Muse Spark Open and Qwen2.5-Coder don't publish scores on any of the same benchmarks.