Roboflow

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 27B

Compare Muse Spark 1.1 and Qwen3.8 27B side-by-side.

Compare Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 27B live

Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.

These models don't share enough common tasks for a side-by-side demo. See the comparison table below for their capabilities.

Models in this comparison

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 27B on Vision Evals

Muse Spark 1.1 scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.

The widest gap is Reasoning, where Muse Spark 1.1 leads 74.8% to 31.8%.

Overall, Muse Spark 1.1 averages 79.3% (#7 of 30) against 61.2% (#29 of 30) for Qwen3.8 27B.

Qwen3.8 27B is both cheaper ($0.0018 vs $0.0069 per sample) and faster (7.3s vs 11.4s per sample).

Muse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 27B

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 27B Comparison Table

Evals updated August 14, 2026Pricing updated August 15, 2026

PropertyMuse Spark 1.1Qwen3.8 27B
OrganizationMetaQwen
Categoryclosedopen
Modalitymultimodalmultimodal
Release DateJul 2026Aug 2026
Context Window1.0M262K
Parameters27.78B
LicenseProprietaryApache 2.0
Pricing per 1M tokens
Input $/1M$1.25$0.450
Output $/1M$4.25$3.20
Vision Tasks
CaptioningDemo
Chart Question Answering
ClassificationDemo
Document Question Answering
Image Tagging
Multi-Label Classification
OCRDemo
Vision Language
Visual Question AnsweringDemo
Object DetectionDemo
Model Features
Foundation Vision
LLMs with Vision Capabilities
Multimodal Vision
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort
Overall
79.3%
61.2%
Avg cost / sample$0.0069$0.0018
Avg speed / sample11.40s7.33s
By task
Object Detection
58.4%
$0.010
54.5%
$0.0036
Counting
75.7%
$0.0043
41.9%
$0.0005
Identification
87.5%
$0.0032
78.1%
$0.0005
OCR
92.5%
$0.0063
81.4%
$0.0019
Data Extraction
86.6%
$0.0031
79.4%
$0.0005
Reasoning (low)
74.8%
$0.0065
31.8%
$0.0005
Reasoning (high)
76.2%
$0.013
62.3%
$0.0087

Muse Spark 1.1 vs Qwen3.8 27B: Overview

Muse Spark 1.1

Muse Spark 1.1 is a natively multimodal reasoning model from Meta Superintelligence Labs, released on July 9, 2026, as a significant upgrade to the original Muse Spark. The model accepts text, image, video, PDF, and audio as input and produces text output. It operates with a 1-million-token context window (1,048,576 tokens per the Meta Model API documentation) and is designed specifically for agentic tasks that require planning, tool use, computer use, and multi-agent orchestration. The model runs in a "Thinking" mode, where adjustable reasoning effort is applied before generating a response. It can function both as a main agent gathering context, forming plans, and delegating to parallel subagents and as a subagent that adheres to assigned tasks and escalates when needed. It is trained to decide autonomously when to write automation scripts versus interact directly with a user interface.

Muse Spark 1.1 supports a range of multimodal capabilities including visual perception, image and video captioning, visual-to-code generation, and document analysis. The model was evaluated under Meta's Advanced AI Scaling Framework across frontier risk categories including chemical and biological threats, cybersecurity, and loss-of-control scenarios. Parameter count, architecture details, and training data composition are not publicly disclosed. The model is proprietary and closed-weight, accessible to consumers through the Meta AI app and to developers via the Meta Model API, which launched in public preview alongside this release.

Qwen3.8 27B

Qwen3.8-27B is a dense vision-language model of roughly 27.78 billion parameters from Alibaba's Qwen team, built on the architectural foundation established by the Qwen3.5 generation. It takes interleaved text, image, and video input through an integrated vision encoder and produces text, covering document and chart understanding, visual question answering, front-end code generation from visual references, and agentic computer-use workflows. The decoder is a hybrid stack of 64 layers that repeats a pattern of three Gated DeltaNet linear-attention blocks, each followed by a feed-forward block, then one grouped-query full-attention block, so only a quarter of the layers maintain a conventional key-value cache. Native context length is 262,144 tokens.

Post-training targets long-horizon agentic work, and the model exposes per-request thinking control that lets callers switch reasoning traces on or off and choose a reasoning effort level. Multi-token prediction weights are trained alongside the main network for speculative decoding. Qwen reports improvements over Qwen3.6-27B on agentic and multimodal evaluations including Terminal-Bench 2.1, OSWorld-Verified, and SWE-bench Multimodal, with additional results on MathVision, CharXiv, and an internal Vision2Web suite.

Frequently Asked Questions

On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Muse Spark 1.1 performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 79.3% (#7 of 30) against 61.2% (#29 of 30) for Qwen3.8 27B. These scores measure vision capabilities only; either model may perform differently on work outside this benchmark's tasks.

Yes. On the Vision Evals Reasoning benchmark at low effort, Muse Spark 1.1 leads with 74.8% against 31.8%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.

Qwen3.8 27B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0018 per sample against $0.0069. Muse Spark 1.1 is priced at $1.25 per 1M input tokens and $4.25 per 1M output; Qwen3.8 27B is priced at $0.45 per 1M input tokens and $3.20 per 1M output. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.

Qwen3.8 27B is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 7.3s per inference against 11.4s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.