Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash vs Meta: Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor
Side-by-side comparison of specs, pricing, benchmark scores, and task rankings. Updated 2026-10-13.
| Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash | Meta: Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor | |
|---|---|---|
| Vendor | qwen | meta |
| Quality Score | 100 | 100 |
| Input Price | $0.15/M | $0.10/M |
| Output Price | $0.47/M | $0.20/M |
| Context Window | 1,000,000 | 1,048,576 |
| Max Output | 131,072 | 943,718 |
| Tool Calling | ✓ | ✓ |
| Structured Output | ✓ | ✓ |
| Reasoning Mode | ✓ | ✓ |
| Vision | ✓ | ✓ |
| Audio | ✓ | - |
The verdict
For a sample job of 1 million input tokens and 250,000 output tokens, Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor costs $0.15 and Qwen3.8 Omni Flash costs $0.27, so Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor is about 1.8 times cheaper for the same work.
Both take in a similar amount of text: 1,000,000 and 1,048,576 tokens, about 1,500 and 1,573 pages.
Only Qwen3.8 Omni Flash offers audio input.
Across the 5 tasks where they differ, Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor on 5 (SQL Generation, CSV / Spreadsheet Cleanup, Bulk Data Labeling and others).
Pick Qwen3.8 Omni Flash if you need audio input; pick Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor if you need lower cost or the stronger all-round task scores.
Costs use current list prices per million tokens; page counts assume about 0.75 words per token and 500 words per page.
Who wins by task?
| Task | Qwen: Qwen3.8 Omni Flash | Meta: Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor |
|---|---|---|
| SQL Generation | 133 | 134 |
| CSV / Spreadsheet Cleanup | 133 | 134 |
| Bulk Data Labeling | 129 | 129 |
| Long-Document Summarization | 137 | 138 |
| Blog Post Writing | 121 | 122 |
Scores reflect capability match + benchmark data + pricing for each task. Methodology →