Qwen3.8 27B vs Muse Spark 1.1 vs Inkling Small
Too close to call on our weighted score (Muse Spark 1.1 69, Inkling Small 68, Qwen3.8 27B 66). The right pick depends on what you value most.
Alibaba (Qwen)Qwen3.8 27B
66/100- ECI151.8
- Price$0.40 / $2.55
- Context262K
MetaMuse Spark 1.1
69/100- ECI154.2
- Price$1.25 / $4.25
- Context1.05M
Thinking MachinesInkling Small
68/100- ECI150.5
- Price$0.58 / $1.44
- Context1.05M
Too close to call
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Muse Spark 1.1 69/100, Inkling Small 68/100, Qwen3.8 27B 66/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Muse Spark 1.1 for raw capability and Inkling Small on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
- CapabilityMuse Spark 1.1Capabilities Index (ECI): Muse Spark 1.1 154.2 · Qwen3.8 27B 151.8 · Inkling Small 150.5
- Lowest priceInkling SmallInkling Small $0.795 · Qwen3.8 27B $0.938 · Muse Spark 1.1 $2.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
- Longest contextMuse Spark 1.1 and Inkling SmallMuse Spark 1.1 1,048,576 · Inkling Small 1,048,576 · Qwen3.8 27B 262,144 tokens
- Widest inputsMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 27B: Text, Images, Video · Muse Spark 1.1: Text, Images, PDFs, Video · Inkling Small: Text, Images, Audio
- Self-hostingQwen3.8 27B and Inkling SmallPublishes downloadable weights (Apache-2.0)
| Measure | Weight | Qwen3.8 27B | Muse Spark 1.1 | Inkling Small |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI) | 50% | 79 | 82 | 77 |
| Price | 25% | 49 | 34 | 52 |
| Inputs & features | 15% | 70 | 90 | 70 |
| Context window | 10% | 37 | 61 | 61 |
| Overall | 100% | 66/100 | 69/100 | 68/100 |
Every spec in one table
Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.
| Specification | Qwen3.8 27BAlibaba (Qwen) | Muse Spark 1.1Meta | Inkling SmallThinking Machines |
|---|---|---|---|
| Capability | |||
| Capabilities Index (ECI) | 151.8 | 154.2 (best) | 150.5 |
| ECI rank | #54 of 165 | #46 of 165 (best) | #58 of 165 |
| GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions | — | — | 88.5% |
| FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics | — | — | 46.3% |
| OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics | — | — | 90.0% |
| SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions | — | 57.8% (best) | 19.1% |
| Price per million tokens | |||
| Input | $0.40 (best) | $1.25 | $0.58 |
| Output | $2.55 | $4.25 | $1.44 (best) |
| Cached input | — | $0.15 | $0.116 (best) |
| Blended (3:1) | $0.938 | $2.00 | $0.795 (best) |
| Long-context rate | Same rate | Same rate | Same rate |
| Price source | Median of 49 providers | Official Meta API | Official Thinking Machines API |
| Limits | |||
| Context window | 262,144 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Max output | 32,768 tokens | 131,072 tokens | 1,048,576 tokens (best) |
| Inputs and features | |||
| Text | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Images | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| PDFs | No | Yes | No |
| Audio | No | No | Yes |
| Video | Yes | Yes | No |
| Reasoning | Yes | Yesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh | Yeslow · medium · high · xhigh · max |
| Tool calling | Yes | Yes | Yes |
| Structured output | No | Yes | No |
| Availability | |||
| Weights | Open | Proprietary | OpenApache-2.0 |
| API model ID | — | muse-spark-1.1 | thinkingmachines/Inkling-Small |
| API providers | 53 (best) | 15 | 12 |
| Released | Aug 14, 2026 | Jul 9, 2026 | Jul 30, 2026 |
| Knowledge cutoff | — | — | — |
What would a month cost?
Enter your expected volume in millions of tokens. List prices only; caching and batch discounts would lower these.
- Qwen3.8 27B$9.10
- Muse Spark 1.1$21.00
- Inkling Small$8.68
Which should you choose?
Which is better: Qwen3.8 27B, Muse Spark 1.1 or Inkling Small?
It is close. Our weighted score puts them within a point (Muse Spark 1.1 69/100, Inkling Small 68/100, Qwen3.8 27B 66/100), so choose by what matters most for your work: Muse Spark 1.1 for raw capability and Inkling Small on price. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.
Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 27B, Muse Spark 1.1 or Inkling Small?
Inkling Small is cheaper at $0.58 input / $1.44 output per million tokens (official Thinking Machines API price). Qwen3.8 27B costs $0.40 input / $2.55 output per million tokens (median across 49 API providers); Muse Spark 1.1 costs $1.25 input / $4.25 output per million tokens (official Meta API price). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $0.795 per million tokens for Inkling Small versus $0.938 for Qwen3.8 27B (1.2× as much) and $2.00 for Muse Spark 1.1 (2.5× as much).
Which scores higher on benchmarks?
Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Muse Spark 1.1 154.2 (#46 of 165), Qwen3.8 27B 151.8 (#54 of 165) and Inkling Small 150.5 (#58 of 165). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (151.3–156.4 vs 149.9–153.6), so treat the gap as small.
Which is better for coding?
There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.8 27B, Muse Spark 1.1 and Inkling Small yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Muse Spark 1.1 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. All three support tool calling for agent workflows.
Which has the bigger context window?
Muse Spark 1.1 and Inkling Small have the largest context windows (1,048,576 and 1,048,576 tokens), against 262,144 for Qwen3.8 27B. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.8 27B up to 32,768, Muse Spark 1.1 up to 131,072, Inkling Small up to 1,048,576 tokens.
Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?
Qwen3.8 27B accepts text, images and video; Muse Spark 1.1 accepts text, images, PDFs and video; Inkling Small accepts text, images and audio. Muse Spark 1.1 handles the widest range of inputs.
Are any of these open source?
Qwen3.8 27B and Inkling Small publishes its weights (Apache-2.0) and can be self-hosted; Muse Spark 1.1 is proprietary.
Which is newer?
Qwen3.8 27B is the newest, released Aug 14, 2026. Inkling Small came out Jul 30, 2026; Muse Spark 1.1 came out Jul 9, 2026.
How do you decide the winner?
Each model gets a 0–100 score on capability (50%, independent benchmark results); price (25%, blended price per million tokens (3 input : 1 output), log scale); inputs & features (15%, image, PDF, audio and video input, tool calling, structured output and reasoning); context window (10%, maximum tokens per request, log scale). Dimensions missing for any model are dropped and the remaining weights rescaled, so every model is judged on the same evidence. Specs and prices come from public model listings and the labs’ own API pages; capability scores come from independent benchmark runs. Data updated Nov 2, 2026.
Related comparisons
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Mistral Large 4Mistral AI · ECI 150.6
- Qwen3.8 27B vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813DeepSeek · ECI 155.9
- Qwen3.8 27B vs Gemini 3 Flash PreviewGoogle · ECI 152.0
- Muse Spark 1.1 vs Gemini 3.6 FlashGoogle · ECI 154.7
- Muse Spark 1.1 vs Grok 4.5xAI · ECI 154.4
- Muse Spark 1.1 vs GLM-5.2Z.ai (Zhipu) · ECI 152.1
