Muse Spark 1.3 or Qwen3.7 Plus: which to choose?

The match-up at a glance

This comparison pits two budget models, built for high volumes at a low price against each other: Muse Spark 1.3 and Qwen3.7 Plus, one from Meta, the other from Alibaba Cloud (Qwen). The first dates from September 2, 2026, the second from June 2, 2026.

All figures below come from public sources checked on October 22, 2026: models.dev and OpenRouter for prices and capabilities, Epoch AI for scores.

Which one is more capable?

On our capability index, Muse Spark 1.3 scores 82.7 out of 100 and Qwen3.7 Plus 56.2. Muse Spark 1.3 leads by 26.5 points.

On the 2 benchmarks reported for both, Muse Spark 1.3 wins 2 times and Qwen3.7 Plus 0:

• OTIS Mock AIME (competition mathematics problems): Muse Spark 1.3 99.2%, Qwen3.7 Plus 93.3%
• FrontierMath (very hard research-level mathematics): Muse Spark 1.3 74.4%, Qwen3.7 Plus 34.4%

Budget

Muse Spark 1.3 costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.20 per million output tokens; Qwen3.7 Plus costs $0.40 and $1.6.

For a typical agent task (read 20,000 tokens, write 2,000), expect $0.002 with Muse Spark 1.3 versus $0.011 with Qwen3.7 Plus. Muse Spark 1.3 is 4.7 times cheaper, a gap that adds up quickly over 1,000 tasks: $8.8 difference.

Run the numbers with your own volumes in the agent cost calculator.

Context and capabilities

Muse Spark 1.3 reads more in one go: 1,048,576 tokens of context (roughly 1,573 pages), versus 1,000,000 for Qwen3.7 Plus.

Reasoning mode: Muse Spark 1.3 yes, Qwen3.7 Plus yes. Tool calling: Muse Spark 1.3 yes, Qwen3.7 Plus yes. Image input: Muse Spark 1.3 yes, Qwen3.7 Plus yes.

Neither publishes its weights: both are used through an API.

In short

Our reading of the data:

• Choose Muse Spark 1.3 for a higher capability index, a lower cost and a more recent release.

This verdict relies on public figures; it does not replace a trial on your own tasks.