AI model comparison
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Muse Spark 1.2
Pricing, context window, benchmarks, and features compared side by side. Or skip the guesswork and send one prompt to both.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B is an open-weight sparse mixture-of-experts model from Qwen and the open-weight variant of [Qwen3.8 Max](/qwen/qwen3.8-max), with 95 billion active parameters out of 2.4 trillion total.
- Input / 1M
- $2
- Output / 1M
- $6
- Context
- 1.05M
Meta
Muse Spark 1.2
Muse Spark 1.2 is a reasoning model from Meta, designed for complex agentic tasks.
- Input / 1M
- $1.25
- Output / 1M
- $4.25
- Context
- 1.05M
At a glance
Quick verdict
How the two models stack up on the things people ask about most.
Lower price
Muse Spark 1.2
1.5x cheaper for a typical chat
Higher intelligence score
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
39.9 vs 39.6 on Artificial Analysis
Larger context window
Tie
1.05M vs 1.05M tokens
Newer release
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B
Released August 12, 2026
Benchmarks
Benchmark scores
Independent scores from Artificial Analysis. Higher is better.
Intelligence index
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B39.9Coding index
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B71.9Agentic index
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B50.1Pricing
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Muse Spark 1.2 API pricing
Per-token API rates. Cheaper option highlighted.
| Metric | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | |
|---|---|---|
| Input tokensPer 1M tokens | $2 | $1.25 |
| Output tokensPer 1M tokens | $6 | $4.25 |
| Cached input (read)Per 1M tokens | $0.25 | $0.15 |
| Cache writePer 1M tokens | Not available | Not available |
| Web searchPer request | Not available | $0.0025 |
What it costs in practice
Estimated cost per 1,000 requests at standard rates. Coding and long-document figures also show the cost when the input is already cached.
Chat message
2K in, 500 out
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$7Coding task
30K in, 4K out
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$84$31.50 cachedLong document summary
150K in, 2K out
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B$312$49.50 cachedSpecs
Context window and capabilities
How much each model can read, how much it can write, and what it accepts as input.
| Metric | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | |
|---|---|---|
| Context window | 1.05M tokens | 1.05M tokens |
| Max output | 131K tokens | 944K tokens |
| Input types | Text | File, Image, Text, Video |
| Output types | Text | Text |
| Reasoning effort levels | Extra high, Medium, Low | Extra high, High, Medium, Low, Minimal |
| Default reasoning effort | Extra high | Medium |
| Release date | August 12, 2026 | August 5, 2026 |
Features
Supported features
API features available for each model.
| Metric | Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B | |
|---|---|---|
| Tool calling | Supported | Supported |
| Structured outputs | Supported | Supported |
| JSON mode | Supported | Supported |
| Reasoning | Supported | Supported |
| Temperature | Supported | Supported |
| Stop sequences | Supported | Not supported |
| Deterministic seed | Supported | Not supported |
| Verbosity control | Not supported | Not supported |
Keep exploring
More on these models
Other head-to-heads, the full model page, and the alternatives list for each model.
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95BView full model details- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Qwen3.8 Max (0902)
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs GLM 5.3
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Kimi K3
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs GPT-5.6 Terra
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Grok 4.5
- Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B vs Claude Sonnet 5
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs GLM 5.3
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs GLM 5.3 Flash
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs Gemini 3.8 Flash
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs Gemini 3.7 Flash
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs DeepSeek V4.1 Flash
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs Grok 4.5
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs Claude Sonnet 5
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs GPT-5.6 Luna
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs DeepSeek V4 Pro 0813
- Muse Spark 1.2 vs Muse Spark 1.1
Our take
Muse Spark 1.2 is 1.5x cheaper for a typical chat. Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores higher on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index (39.9 vs 39.6). The right pick depends on your workload, so the quickest way to settle it is to send the same prompt to both and compare.
FAQ
Frequently asked questions
Is Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Muse Spark 1.2 cheaper?
Muse Spark 1.2 is cheaper for a typical chat (2K input tokens and 500 output tokens). Muse Spark 1.2 costs $1.25 per 1M input tokens and $4.25 per 1M output tokens, while Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B costs $2 per 1M input tokens and $6 per 1M output tokens.
Which has a bigger context window, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B or Muse Spark 1.2?
Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B supports up to 1.05M tokens of context, compared with 1.05M for Muse Spark 1.2.
Is Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B smarter than Muse Spark 1.2?
On the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B scores 39.9 and Muse Spark 1.2 scores 39.6, putting Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B ahead. Benchmarks don't capture everything, so the best test is running your own prompts through both.
Can I use Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Muse Spark 1.2 at the same time?
Yes. Shortcut Chat sends one prompt to multiple models at once, so you can see Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Muse Spark 1.2 answer side by side and keep the better response.
Why choose? Ask both.
Send one prompt to Qwen3.8 2.4T A95B and Muse Spark 1.2 at the same time. Compare the answers side by side and keep the best one.