Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B
Compare Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen3.5 35B A3B side-by-side. See how these vision models stack up in Open Prompt, OCR, and Image Captioning.
Compare Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B live
Run the same image across every model that supports a task and compare their outputs side-by-side.
Extract and compare text from images across multiple models.
Upload an image
Drag and drop an image here, or click to browse
Models in this comparison
Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B on Vision Evals
Muse Spark 1.3 scores higher on all six Vision Evals tasks.
The widest gap is Reasoning, where Muse Spark 1.3 leads 73.3% to 54.3%.
Overall, Muse Spark 1.3 averages 79.8% (#10 of 52) against 70.3% (#24 of 52) for Qwen3.5 35B A3B.
Qwen3.5 35B A3B is cheaper ($0.0015 vs $0.0075 per sample), while Muse Spark 1.3 is faster (23.1s vs 29.3s per sample).
Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B Comparison Table
Evals updated September 3, 2026Pricing updated September 3, 2026
| Property | Muse Spark 1.3 | Qwen3.5 35B A3B |
|---|---|---|
| Organization | Meta | Qwen |
| Category | closed | open |
| Modality | multimodal | multimodal |
| Release Date | Sep 2026 | Feb 2026 |
| Context Window | 1.0M | 262K |
| Parameters | 35B | |
| License | Proprietary | Apache 2.0 |
| Pricing per 1M tokens | ||
| Input $/1M | $1.25 | $0.250 |
| Output $/1M | $4.25 | $1.25 |
| Vision Tasks | ||
| Captioning | Demo | Demo |
| Chart Question Answering | ||
| Classification | Demo | |
| Document Question Answering | ||
| Image Tagging | ||
| Multi-Label Classification | ||
| Object Detection | Demo | |
| OCR | Demo | Demo |
| Vision Language | ||
| Visual Question Answering | Demo | Demo |
| Model Features | ||
| Foundation Vision | ||
| LLMs with Vision Capabilities | ||
| Multimodal Vision | ||
Vision Evalsground-truth scores across 6 vision tasks, pooled at low effort | ||
| Overall | 79.8% | 70.3% |
| Quantizationsself-hosted | ||
| Avg cost / sample | $0.0075 | $0.0015 |
| Avg speed / sample | 23.14s | 29.34s |
| By task | ||
| Object Detection (low) | 58.6% ±0.7, Mean of 3 runs, range 58.0 to 59.4 | 55.9% |
| Object Detection (high) | 56.6% ±2.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 54.5 to 59.3 | – |
| Counting (low) | 74.3% ±2.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 77.0 | 62.2% |
| Counting (high) | 75.7% ±3.4, Mean of 3 runs, range 73.0 to 79.7 | – |
| Identification (low) | 92.7% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.6 to 93.8 | 81.3% |
| Identification (high) | 86.5% ±1.6, Mean of 3 runs, range 84.4 to 87.5 | – |
| OCR (low) | 91.3% ±0.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 90.7 to 91.6 | 83.2% |
| OCR (high) | 86.9% ±4.1, Mean of 3 runs, range 82.2 to 90.4 | – |
| Data Extraction (low) | 88.7% ±1.5, Mean of 3 runs, range 86.6 to 89.7 | 84.7% |
| Data Extraction (high) | 87.6% ±0.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 87.6 to 87.6 | – |
| Reasoning (low) | 73.3% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.2 to 74.2 | 54.3% |
| Reasoning (high) | 73.1% ±1.0, Mean of 3 runs, range 72.2 to 74.2 | – |
Muse Spark 1.3 vs Qwen3.5 35B A3B: Overview
Muse Spark 1.3 is a proprietary multimodal reasoning model from Meta Superintelligence Labs and the fourth Muse Spark release in five months, arriving on September 2, 2026. It takes text, images, video, and document files as input and returns text, and it operates over a context window of 1,048,576 tokens. Meta trains the model for long-horizon agentic work, so it carries accumulated context and prior tool results forward across many turns, reconciles messy or conflicting inputs, and asks for clarification when a task is underspecified. Visual inputs such as screenshots and video clips feed a reasoning loop that runs against a real execution environment rather than a scripted sequence of steps.
The model exposes graded reasoning effort settings. An xhigh configuration is generally available at launch, while a max reasoning configuration aimed at harder reasoning and agentic problems arrives after further safety testing. Artificial Analysis measures Muse Spark 1.3 (max) at 62 on its Intelligence Index and the xhigh configuration at 61, with agentic tool-use evaluations driving most of the gain over Muse Spark 1.2; max reaches 52% on Tau3-Bench Banking by spending more turns and reasoning tokens than xhigh. Prior Muse Spark versions emit bounding box coordinates, transcriptions, and structured field extractions from images on Roboflow Vision Evals.
The Qwen3.5-35B-A3B is a native vision-language model developed by Alibaba Cloud’s Qwen team, released on February 24, 2026, as a high-efficiency entry in the Qwen 3.5 family. It utilizes a sophisticated hybrid architecture that integrates Gated Delta Networks with a sparse Mixture-of-Experts (MoE) system. While the model houses 35 billion total parameters, its routing mechanism activates only 8 routed experts and 1 shared expert per token, totaling approximately 3 billion active parameters. This design achieves cross-generational parity with the previous flagship Qwen3-235B dense model, delivering comparable reasoning and multimodal intelligence with significantly reduced inference latency and compute requirements. Available under the Apache 2.0 license, it is released in both base and instruction-tuned variants for seamless integration with open-source stacks like vLLM and Hugging Face Transformers.
Designed for the emerging era of agentic AI, the model utilizes a unified multimodal foundation built through early-fusion training. This approach allows it to outperform the prior Qwen3-VL series in spatial grounding, document analysis, and UI/GUI interaction. It features a native context window of 262,144 tokens, which is extensible up to 1,010,000 tokensvia RoPE scaling, and provides global support for 201 languages and dialects. This combination of a compact active parameter count and frontier-level visual comprehension makes it a versatile tool for developers requiring a balance of high-throughput speed and sophisticated visual reasoning for long-context workflows.
Frequently Asked Questions
On Roboflow's Vision Evals, Muse Spark 1.3 performed better. It scores higher on all six vision tasks and averages 79.8% (#10 of 52) against 70.3% (#24 of 52) for Qwen3.5 35B A3B. 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 1.3 leads with 73.3% against 54.3%. This is the widest gap between the two models across the benchmark's tasks.
Qwen3.5 35B A3B is cheaper to run. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals task mix it averaged $0.0015 per sample against $0.0075. Actual costs depend on your image sizes, prompts, and output length.
Muse Spark 1.3 is faster. Across Roboflow's Vision Evals it averaged 23.1s per inference against 29.3s. Latency varies with image size, prompt length, and provider load, so treat these as relative rather than guaranteed figures.
Yes. The comparison demo on this page runs both models on the same image side by side for open prompts and OCR in the free Roboflow Playground. You can try it instantly, and a free account unlocks unlimited runs.