ZMIME
Comparison · 2 models · Updated Oct 4, 2026

Qwen3.8 Max 0902 vs Muse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 comes out ahead, 70 to 67 on our weighted score, and it is the cheaper option too.

  1. Alibaba (Qwen)

    Qwen3.8 Max 0902

    Released Sep 2, 2026

    67/100
    • ECI155.2
    • Price$2.00 / $6.00
    • Context1M
    Full specs Remove Qwen3.8 Max 0902
  2. Our pick

    Meta

    Muse Spark 1.1

    Released Jul 9, 2026

    70/100
    • ECI154.3
    • Price$1.25 / $4.25
    • Context1.05M
    Full specs Remove Muse Spark 1.1

  3. Add a model

    Make it a three-way comparison.

01 — Verdict

Muse Spark 1.1 is our pick

Muse Spark 1.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Qwen3.8 Max 0902 (67). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

  • CapabilityQwen3.8 Max 0902Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 Max 0902 155.2 · Muse Spark 1.1 154.3
  • Lowest priceMuse Spark 1.1Muse Spark 1.1 $2.00 · Qwen3.8 Max 0902 $3.00 per 1M tokens (3:1 blend)
  • Longest contextMuse Spark 1.1Muse Spark 1.1 1,048,576 · Qwen3.8 Max 0902 1,000,000 tokens
  • Widest inputsSame inputsQwen3.8 Max 0902: Text, Images, PDFs, Video · Muse Spark 1.1: Text, Images, PDFs, Video
  • Self-hostingNo open weightsBoth are available only through APIs
How the score is built
MeasureWeightQwen3.8 Max 0902Muse Spark 1.1
CapabilityCapabilities Index (ECI)50%8584
Price25%2736
Inputs & features15%8090
Context window10%6061
Overall100%67/10070/100
02 — Side by side

Every spec in one table

Highlighted cells lead their row. Dashes mean the data is not published.

Qwen3.8 Max 0902 vs Muse Spark 1.1 specifications side by side
SpecificationQwen3.8 Max 0902Alibaba (Qwen)Muse Spark 1.1Meta
Capability
Capabilities Index (ECI)155.2 (best)154.3
ECI rank#28 of 148 (best)#35 of 148
GPQA DiamondGraduate-level science questions92.3%—
FrontierMath Tiers 1–3Research-level mathematics65.6%—
OTIS Mock AIME 2024–2025Competition mathematics100%—
SimpleQA VerifiedShort factual questions47.3%57.8% (best)
Price per million tokens
Input$2.00$1.25 (best)
Output$6.00$4.25 (best)
Cached input—$0.15
Blended (3:1)$3.00$2.00 (best)
Long-context rateSame rateSame rate
Price sourceMedian of 6 providersOfficial Meta API
Limits
Context window1,000,000 tokens1,048,576 tokens (best)
Max output131,072 tokens131,072 tokens
Inputs and features
TextYesYes
ImagesYesYes
PDFsYesYes
AudioNoNo
VideoYesYes
ReasoningYesYesminimal · low · medium · high · xhigh
Tool callingYesYes
Structured outputNoYes
Availability
WeightsProprietaryProprietary
API model ID—muse-spark-1.1
API providers613 (best)
ReleasedSep 2, 2026Jul 9, 2026
Knowledge cutoff——
03 — Cost

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 Max 0902$32.00
  • Muse Spark 1.1$21.00
04 — Questions

Which should you choose?

Which is better: Qwen3.8 Max 0902 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 is the better all-round choice, scoring 70/100 against Qwen3.8 Max 0902 (67). It leads on price and inputs & features. The score weighs capability 50%, price 25%, inputs & features 15%, context window 10%.

Which is cheaper, Qwen3.8 Max 0902 or Muse Spark 1.1?

Muse Spark 1.1 is cheaper at $1.25 input / $4.25 output per million tokens (official Meta API price). Qwen3.8 Max 0902 costs $2.00 input / $6.00 output per million tokens (median across 6 API providers). At a typical mix of three input tokens to one output token, that is $2.00 per million tokens for Muse Spark 1.1 versus $3.00 for Qwen3.8 Max 0902 (1.5× as much).

Which scores higher on benchmarks?

Qwen3.8 Max 0902 scores higher on the Capabilities Index (ECI): Qwen3.8 Max 0902 155.2 (#28 of 148) and Muse Spark 1.1 154.3 (#35 of 148). The confidence ranges of the top two overlap (153.2–157.3 vs 152.2–157.1), so treat the gap as small. On individual benchmarks: SimpleQA Verified — Muse Spark 1.1 57.8%, Qwen3.8 Max 0902 47.3%.

Which is better for coding?

There are no published SWE-bench Verified results for Qwen3.8 Max 0902 and Muse Spark 1.1 yet, so there is no like-for-like coding score. On overall capability, Qwen3.8 Max 0902 leads, which tends to carry over to coding, but test on your own codebase. Both support tool calling for agent workflows.

Which has the bigger context window?

Muse Spark 1.1 has the largest context window at 1,048,576 tokens, against 1,000,000 for Qwen3.8 Max 0902. Maximum output per response: Qwen3.8 Max 0902 up to 131,072, Muse Spark 1.1 up to 131,072 tokens.

Which can read images, PDFs, audio or video?

Qwen3.8 Max 0902 accepts text, images, PDFs and video; Muse Spark 1.1 accepts text, images, PDFs and video. They handle the same number of input types.

Are any of these open source?

No. Qwen3.8 Max 0902 and Muse Spark 1.1 are proprietary and only available through APIs and apps.

Which is newer?

Qwen3.8 Max 0902 is the newest, released Sep 2, 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 Oct 4, 2026.

05 — Keep comparing

Related comparisons