Skip to main content
BenchLM
Advertise

Model comparison

Muse Spark vs Qwen3.7 Plus

Data verified

Head-to-head evidence from 28 shared benchmark results across 6 categories. Overall scores shown here use the public BenchAlign v5 ranking lane.

71.04/100
Margin
3.8pts
← winning
67.22/100
1 category wins5 category wins

Public leaderboard positions: Muse Spark #13 (Supported); Qwen3.7 Plus #21 (Supported). Intervals and evidence labels describe ranking uncertainty, not a guarantee for a specific workload.

Evidence parity. Muse Spark and Qwen3.7 Plus share 28 comparable benchmark results. 6 of 8 categories are comparable. 11 results are unique to Muse Spark; 41 to Qwen3.7 Plus.

Updated July 23, 2026
Shared results
28
Muse Spark only
11
Qwen3.7 Plus only
41
Comparable categories
6 / 8

Pick Muse Spark if you want the stronger benchmark profile. Qwen3.7 Plus only becomes the better choice if mathematics is the priority or you need the larger 1M context window.

Confidence note. This is a partial-evidence comparison with 28 shared benchmark results across 6 evidence categories; 6 of 8 categories currently have scoreable aggregates for both models. Treat the verdict as directional until coverage is more balanced.

Why this result

Muse Spark is clearly ahead on the BenchAlign aggregate, 71.04 to 67.22. The gap is large enough that you do not need to squint at the spreadsheet to see the difference.

Muse Spark's sharpest advantage is in multimodal & grounded, where it averages 82.5 against 81.5. The single biggest benchmark swing on the page is HLE, 50.4% to 34.7%. Qwen3.7 Plus does hit back in mathematics, so the answer changes if that is the part of the workload you care about most.

Qwen3.7 Plus gives you the larger context window at 1M, compared with 262K for Muse Spark.

Category breakdown

Exact category averages are shown below. Not measured means BenchLM does not have enough sourced public coverage for that model and category.

Category scores and score margins for Muse Spark and Qwen3.7 Plus
CategoryMuse SparkΔQwen3.7 Plus
MathMuse Spark32.9Margin→ 60.0Qwen3.7 Plus92.9
ReasoningMuse Spark42.5Margin→ 49.2Qwen3.7 Plus91.7
AgenticMuse Spark59.0Margin→ 12.7Qwen3.7 Plus71.7
KnowledgeMuse Spark50.4Margin→ 9.7Qwen3.7 Plus60.1
CodingMuse Spark67.8Margin→ 7.8Qwen3.7 Plus75.6
MultimodalMuse Spark82.5Margin← 1.0Qwen3.7 Plus81.5
MultilingualMuse SparkNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus85.4
Inst. FollowingMuse SparkNot measuredMarginNo overlapQwen3.7 Plus84.5

Decisive benchmark drivers

The largest measured benchmark gaps in this matchup, with exact reported values.

More
A · Muse SparkB · Qwen3.7 Plus

  1. HLE

    Knowledge
    Source ↗
    A 50.4%B 34.7%
    Winner: Muse SparkΔ 15.7
    HLE: Muse Spark scored 50.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 34.7%. Muse Spark wins this benchmark.

  2. Terminal-Bench 2.0

    Agentic
    Source ↗
    A 59%B 70.3%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 11.3
    Terminal-Bench 2.0: Muse Spark scored 59%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 70.3%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.

  3. SWE-bench Pro

    Coding
    Source ↗
    A 52.4%B 57.6%
    Winner: Qwen3.7 PlusΔ 5.2
    SWE-bench Pro: Muse Spark scored 52.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 57.6%. Qwen3.7 Plus wins this benchmark.

  4. MMMU-Pro

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 80.4%B 79%
    Winner: Muse SparkΔ 1.4
    MMMU-Pro: Muse Spark scored 80.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 79%. Muse Spark wins this benchmark.

  5. CharXiv

    Multimodal
    Source ↗
    A 86.4%B 85.9%
    Winner: Muse SparkΔ 0.5
    CharXiv: Muse Spark scored 86.4%; Qwen3.7 Plus scored 85.9%. Muse Spark wins this benchmark.

Operational comparison

Runtime and commercial metrics are compared only when both models have a complete sourced value.

MetricMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusComparison
Input / output priceUSD per 1M tokensMuse SparkNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete price comparison is not available.
Generation speedtokens per secondMuse SparkNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete speed comparison is not available.
First-answer latencyseconds to first tokenMuse SparkNot availableQwen3.7 PlusNot availableA complete latency comparison is not available.
Context windowmaximum listed tokensMuse Spark262KQwen3.7 Plus1MQwen3.7 Plus lists the larger context window.

Benchmark Deep Dive

AgenticQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusResult
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source 59%70.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
τ²-bench resultsSource 91.5%93%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
DeepSearchQASource 74.8%—Not comparable
CyberGymSource 43.5%—Not comparable
Claw-EvalSource 63.8%62.7%Muse Spark leads
AA Agentic IndexSource 28.7%20.8%Muse Spark leads
GDPval-AASource 32.2%21.8%Muse Spark leads
GDPval-AASource 1144936Muse Spark leads
QwenClawBenchSource —61.8%Not comparable
QwenWebBenchSource —1536Not comparable
BFCL v4Source —72.9%Not comparable
MCP AtlasSource —73.2%Not comparable
VITA-BenchSource —45.6%Not comparable
DeepPlanningSource —62.3%Not comparable
OSWorld-VerifiedSource —73.3%Not comparable
AndroidWorldSource —81.0%Not comparable
APEX-Agents-AASource —22.4%Not comparable
OSWorld 2.0Source —2.8%Not comparable
CodingQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusResult
SWE-bench VerifiedSource 77.4%77.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SWE-bench ProSource 52.4%57.6%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
LiveCodeBench ProSource 80.0%—Not comparable
Vibe Code BenchSource 19.67%—Not comparable
AA Coding IndexSource 58.6%55.9%Muse Spark leads
AA-SciCodeSource 51.5%45.5%Muse Spark leads
Terminal-Bench 2.0Source —70.3%Not comparable
SWE MultilingualSource —75.8%Not comparable
NL2RepoSource —41.1%Not comparable
SciCodeSource —51.3%Not comparable
LiveCodeBenchSource —89.6%Not comparable
ReasoningQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusResult
ARC-AGI-2Source 42.5%—Not comparable
AA-LCRSource 69.7%65.0%Muse Spark leads
CritPtSource 11.3%9.1%Muse Spark leads
MRCRv2Source —91.7%Not comparable
KnowledgeQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusResult
GPQA-DSource 89.5%90.3%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
HLESource 50.4%34.7%Muse Spark leads
HLE w/o toolsSource 42.8%—Not comparable
HealthBench HardSource 42.8%—Not comparable
MedXpertQA (Text)Source 52.6%—Not comparable
Artificial Analysis Intelligence IndexSource 43.1%39.0%Muse Spark leads
AA-GPQA DiamondSource 88.4%90.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
AA-HLESource 39.9%33.4%Muse Spark leads
AA-Omniscience IndexSource 4.1%2.4%Muse Spark leads
AA-Omniscience AccuracySource 44.6%22.2%Muse Spark leads
AA-Omniscience Hallucination RateSource 73.2%25.5%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
GPQASource —90.3%Not comparable
MMLU-ProSource —88.5%Not comparable
MMLU-ReduxSource —94.5%Not comparable
SuperGPQASource —71.4%Not comparable
MMMLUSource —89.0%Not comparable
MathQwen3.7 Plus wins
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusResult
FrontierMath v2 (Tiers 1-3)Source 39.000%—Not comparable
FrontierMath v2 (Tier 4)Source 14.600%—Not comparable
HMMT Feb 2026Source —92.9%Not comparable
IMOAnswerBenchSource —86.0%Not comparable
ApexSource —22.7%Not comparable
Multilingual
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusResult
MMLU-ProXSource —85.4%Not comparable
NOVA-63Source —58.8%Not comparable
INCLUDESource —83.0%Not comparable
MAXIFESource —88.8%Not comparable
PolyMathSource —84.0%Not comparable
MultimodalMuse Spark wins
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusResult
CharXivSource 86.4%85.9%Muse Spark leads
MMMU-ProSource 80.4%79%Muse Spark leads
ERQASource 64.7%69.8%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
SimpleVQASource 71.3%81.7%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
ScreenSpot ProSource 84.1%79.0%Muse Spark leads
ZeroBenchSource 33.0%—Not comparable
MedXpertQA (MM)Source 78.4%71.0%Muse Spark leads
AA-MMMU-ProSource 80.5%80.5%Tie
MathVisionSource —90.3%Not comparable
MMSearch-PlusSource —41.4%Not comparable
RealWorldQASource —86.9%Not comparable
OmniDocBench 1.5Source —91.4%Not comparable
OCRBench V2Source —70.7%Not comparable
ODINW13Source —51.1%Not comparable
Video-MME (with subtitle)Source —88.0%Not comparable
VideoMMMUSource —85.4%Not comparable
MLVU (M-Avg)Source —87.4%Not comparable
Design Arena WebsiteSource —1288Not comparable
Inst. Following
BenchmarkMuse SparkQwen3.7 PlusResult
AA-IFBenchSource 75.9%78.0%Qwen3.7 Plus leads
IFEvalSource —94.6%Not comparable
IFBenchSource —79.1%Not comparable
Frequently Asked Questions (7)

Which is better, Muse Spark or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Muse Spark is ahead on BenchLM's BenchAlign leaderboard, 71.04 to 67.22. The biggest single separator in this matchup is HLE, where the scores are 50.4% and 34.7%.

Which is better for knowledge tasks, Muse Spark or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for knowledge tasks in this comparison, averaging 60.1 versus 50.4. Inside this category, AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for coding, Muse Spark or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for coding in this comparison, averaging 75.6 versus 67.8. Inside this category, AA-SciCode is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for math, Muse Spark or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for math in this comparison, averaging 92.9 versus 32.9. Muse Spark stays close enough that the answer can still flip depending on your workload.

Which is better for reasoning, Muse Spark or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for reasoning in this comparison, averaging 91.7 versus 42.5. Inside this category, AA-LCR is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for agentic tasks, Muse Spark or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Qwen3.7 Plus has the edge for agentic tasks in this comparison, averaging 71.7 versus 59. Inside this category, GDPval-AA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Which is better for multimodal and grounded tasks, Muse Spark or Qwen3.7 Plus?

Muse Spark has the edge for multimodal and grounded tasks in this comparison, averaging 82.5 versus 81.5. Inside this category, SimpleVQA is the benchmark that creates the most daylight between them.

Related Comparisons

Explore More

Meta Compare Pricing Methodology Find Your Best LLM Overall Rankings
Last updated: July 23, 2026

Choose a model with this week’s evidence

Join 2,000+ readers for ranking moves, pricing changes, and the claims that still need proof.

One email each week. Unsubscribe anytime.