STEALTHMARK · HEAD TO HEAD

All comparisons ↗

Muse Spark Open vs Qwen3.6-27B

Muse Spark Open leads Qwen3.6-27B by 11.7 points on StealthMark, 44.1 to 32.4. It leads on 7 of 9 benchmarks, including Latch, and Qwen3.6-27B on 2, including Foresight. Muse Spark Open scores higher on Ground Truth.

See the difference ↘
All results ↗
All results ↗

Overall StealthMark

44.1/100Overall rank 29/53
32.4/100Overall rank 41/53

General Intelligence

42.6/100
25.6/100

Visual Intelligence

46.6/100
43.9/100

Reasoning efficiency

On every task, result quality and reasoning tokens are each compared with all measured models and weighed equally. Each dot is one model.

Single-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens on a single problem

Multi-step reasoning Result quality weighed against reasoning tokens across connected steps, as in agentic workflows

  • Muse Spark Open

Open or local

Local modelOpen model · Apache-2.0

BENCHMARK BY BENCHMARK

Where each model leads

  • Muse Spark Open
  • Qwen3.6-27B
  • Other models
  • Median

DATASHEET

Specs and pricing

Muse Spark Open scores higher on StealthMark and runs 3.8× faster in our speed test. Qwen3.6-27B is 18% cheaper per output token. Both take about 1M tokens of context.

  • Muse Spark Open
  • Qwen3.6-27B
  • Other models
  • Median
PricePer 1M output tokens, input below
Muse Spark Open: $4.25$1.25 inputQwen3.6-27B: $3.6018% cheaper$0.60 input
Context windowTokens per request, max output below
Muse Spark Open: 1MTied1M max outputQwen3.6-27B: 1.01MTied64K max output
Output speedTokens per second, our measurement
Muse Spark Open: 3613.8× fastertokens/sQwen3.6-27B: 96tokens/s
SizeTotal and active parameters
Muse Spark Open: 816B42B activeQwen3.6-27B: 27BAll active
Developer
MetaQwen / Alibaba
Released
15 Oct 202622 Apr 2026
Origin
United StatesChina
Input → output
Text, image, audio, video → textText, image, video → text
Architecture
Sparse mixture-of-experts Transformer with perception encoders; 62 decoder layers, 256 experts with 8 selected per token, grouped-query attention and sliding-window/full-attention layers.Dense causal language model with vision encoder; hybrid Gated DeltaNet and gated attention; MTP-trained

Full datasheets, every price and sourceMuse Spark Open ↗Qwen3.6-27B ↗

Anticipating threats and planning ahead. Collect coins while avoiding ghosts. Ghosts move before the player each turn, and collisions cost a life. 3 levels in sequence, up to 66 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.

Muse Spark Open 29.4/100Rank 34/47

Survived 0 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 38 ptsTurn 15 / 20

Qwen3.6-27B 37.8/100Rank 23/47

Survived 1 of 3
Foresight: complete playing field
Level 39 ptsTurn 20 / 20

Points per level

LevelMuse Spark OpenQwen3.6-27B
Level 1Second Thoughts
4 ptsOut of lives
9 ptsOut of lives
Level 2Pressure Pot
9 ptsOut of lives
6 ptsOut of lives
Level 3Hide or Flight
8 ptsOut of lives
9 ptsSurvived

Cooperative planning and learning from experience. Coordinate two robots to push numbered cores onto matching sockets. Pressure plates hold doors open; moving either robot uses one turn. 5 levels in sequence, up to 152 turns in total. Earlier moves and outcomes carry forward, testing learning across levels.

Muse Spark Open 75.7/100Rank 12/48

Cleared 5 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 519.6 ptsTurn 32 / 40

Qwen3.6-27B 28.5/100Rank 35/48

Cleared 3 of 5
Latch: complete playing field
Level 511 ptsTurn 25 / 40

Points per level

LevelMuse Spark OpenQwen3.6-27B
Level 1Hold the door
5.2 ptsCleared
4.8 ptsCleared
Level 2Crossfeed
9.8 ptsCleared
8.8 ptsClearedFinished early · 1 beacon left
Level 3Relay vault
19.2 ptsCleared
16.4 ptsClearedFinished early · 3 beacons left
Level 4Passing bay
17.8 ptsClearedFinished early · 1 beacon left
13.4 ptsFinished early
Level 5Second thoughts
19.6 ptsCleared
11 ptsFinished early

Newton's Mirror

Same task instructions

Physics, perspective and recursive reflections, tested together. Explore the test ↗

The judgment

Muse Spark Open

The airborne black blob and deformed paint support the broad contact sequence, although cyan attachment and wheel-directed transport remain partial. The sphere and black blob have substantial framing errors. The dominant limitation is the largely absent mirror system: faint wall circles and isolated highlights provide little evidence of recursive room geometry or curved nested reflections. Oversized compact paint features and diffuse material treatment further limit credit.

Qwen3.6-27B

The artwork depicts a shaded sphere, distinct paint colors and a separate airborne black blob. Crimson's apex overlap does not establish its earlier interaction and transport, while cyan's recent contact remains unsupported. Horizontal centering supplies limited camera agreement, but the sphere, black blob and prominent panel have substantial placement or projection departures. A few planar echoes provide reflection evidence; isolated patches and gradients replace most of the required mirror structure.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse Spark OpenQwen3.6-27B
State at 600 ms14.0/255.0/25
Camera and placement6.0/155.0/15
Reflections8.0/1208.0/120
Materials and scale3.5/104.0/10
Floor-damage reward0.0/100.0/10

Benchmark task

A spinning metal sphere and paint in a mirrored room test physical reasoning, perspective and consistency across repeated reflections.

Selfie

Different task instructions

Visual construction and creative interpretation.

The judgment

Muse Spark Open

The rounded silhouette and asymmetric expression make an appealing baby elephant, supported by a quiet background and grounding shadow. The protective action remains difficult to read: forefeet cannot be confidently traced into a grip, and seed contact is crowded by fine lines. Controlled simple shapes provide charm, but limited anatomical clarity, shading and surface detail leave the execution uneven.

Qwen3.6-27B

An appealing decorative illustration with coordinated ornament, flowing panels and three glowing orbital lights. The arm arrangement reverses the requested sides. Uncertain neck continuity, concealed leg articulation, simplified paws, crowded chest jewelry and shallow surface modeling limit pose clarity and finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse Spark OpenQwen3.6-27B
Task & likeness5.0/106.5/10
Anatomy & construction4.5/105.0/10
Space & placement6.0/106.5/10
Light & reflections5.0/105.5/10
Purposeful detail6.0/106.0/10
Artistry & character5.0/105.0/10
Materials & effects5.0/105.0/10
Visual integrity6.5/107.0/10

Benchmark task

Muse Spark Open

A small elephant protecting a delicate seed tests expressive anatomy, physical contact and contrasting organic materials.

Qwen3.6-27B

A floating capybara in ornate robes tests character anatomy, layered fabric and the placement of surrounding luminous forms.

Mona Lisa

Different task instructions

Precise visual recall and portrait reconstruction.

The judgment

Muse Spark Open

A recognizable, orderly interpretation with clean major contours, connected body forms and modest facial shading. Wide eyes, frontal symmetry and schematic hands limit likeness and expression. Layered scenery establishes basic depth, but shallow arm overlaps, flat clothing and sparse fine detail keep the execution basic and uneven.

Qwen3.6-27B

The portrait loosely evokes Mona Lisa through its palette and silhouette. Readable pupils, brows and lips provide limited detail, and the torso remains continuous. The frontal elongated face, unresolved chest-level limb forms, shallow landscape and pervasive blur substantially weaken likeness, anatomy and finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse Spark OpenQwen3.6-27B
Task & likeness3.0/102.5/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/103.0/10
Space & placement5.0/104.0/10
Light & reflections4.5/104.0/10
Purposeful detail4.0/102.5/10
Artistry & character3.0/102.5/10
Materials & effects4.0/103.0/10
Visual integrity6.0/104.0/10

Benchmark task

An SVG interpretation of the Mona Lisa tests facial likeness, anatomy and the composition of a familiar portrait.

Beach

Different task instructions

Creativity, perspective and visual beauty.

The judgment

Muse Spark Open

A coherent sunset beach with readable activities, balanced framing and controlled colour transitions. Small accessories add interest, but schematic anatomy, limited surface detail, weak directional shadows and a geometric reflection constrain its finish. Most shapes and overlaps remain clean.

Qwen3.6-27B

A recognizable sunset beach with balanced palms, clean shapes and effective warm–cool contrast. Small animals and play equipment address the brief, but rudimentary anatomy, uncertain water contacts, sparse reflections and flat materials keep the drawing basic or uneven.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse Spark OpenQwen3.6-27B
Task & likeness8.0/107.5/10
Anatomy & construction6.0/105.0/10
Space & placement6.5/105.5/10
Light & reflections5.5/105.5/10
Purposeful detail6.5/104.5/10
Artistry & character5.5/105.5/10
Materials & effects6.0/105.5/10
Visual integrity8.0/107.0/10

Benchmark task

A busy shoreline at sunset tests scene composition, animal forms and the relationship between light and water reflections.

Ground Truth

Same task instructions

Physical reasoning, light and visual reconstruction.

The judgment

Muse Spark Open

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

Qwen3.6-27B

This benchmark has not been assessed yet.

Benchmark task

A plank, computer mouse and blueberry in a steel room test physical stability, spatial relationships, materials and lighting.

Raccoon

Different task instructions

Scene composition and interacting subjects.

The judgment

Muse Spark Open

Expressive faces, distinct accessories and clean color separation make the scene appealing and recognizable. Character detail is stronger than the functional construction: steering contact, limb overlaps and seating remain ambiguous. The readable hull and lively spray establish motion, while limited directional shading and simplified surfaces constrain depth and physical coherence.

Qwen3.6-27B

A readable cartoon with balanced colors, clean shapes and a clearly supported raccoon. Continuous body construction and modest shading deserve credit. Rudimentary limbs, unresolved steering connections, stiff gestures and schematic water effects limit physical credibility and finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse Spark OpenQwen3.6-27B
Task & likeness4.0/104.5/10
Anatomy & construction3.0/103.5/10
Space & placement6.0/106.0/10
Light & reflections4.5/105.5/10
Purposeful detail7.0/105.5/10
Artistry & character3.5/104.0/10
Materials & effects5.0/105.5/10
Visual integrity5.0/102.5/10

Benchmark task

A jet-ski scene pairs a canine driver with a raccoon passenger. It tests the placement and contact of interacting subjects, along with vehicle construction.

Pelican

Different task instructions

Subject construction and spatial relationships.

The judgment

Muse Spark Open

A controlled, appealing cartoon with a recognizable pelican, expressive face and clean curved forms. Feather lines, spokes and bill shading provide useful complexity. Aligned wheels and a ground shadow establish placement, but uncertain pedal contacts and obscured mechanical connections weaken support and riding action. Lighting remains loosely coordinated with the sun.

Qwen3.6-27B

A lively, coherent illustration with recognizable pelican features, purposeful accessories and useful surface variation. Ambiguous neck layering, uncertain pedal engagement and an unresolved drivetrain limit construction. Aligned wheels and layered scenery establish placement, while inconsistent shadow direction and crowded overlaps constrain finish.

Score breakdown

CategoryMuse Spark OpenQwen3.6-27B
Task & likeness7.5/107.5/10
Anatomy & construction5.0/104.0/10
Space & placement6.0/106.5/10
Light & reflections5.0/105.0/10
Purposeful detail6.5/106.5/10
Artistry & character5.5/105.5/10
Materials & effects6.0/106.5/10
Visual integrity7.5/106.5/10

Benchmark task

A cycling pelican tests anatomy, riding posture and contact between the bird and the bicycle.