Mellum2.1 Thinking vs Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor

Overall
9
vs
Overall
66

Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor is clearly better. It wins 101 of the 103 test cases where they differ.

Learn to build evals like this in the AI Engineering Academy

Task by task

A score turns orange only when that model wins clearly more of the task's test cases. Under each score, the average time per test case on the machine it ran on. Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor spends 1.2× as many thinking tokens per test case.

Thinking tokensAnswer tokens
TaskAB
Overall
91m 56s
10.3K, 63% thinking8.7K, 91% thinking
661m 42s
Agents
92m 3s
10.8K, 93% thinking14.7K, 88% thinking
573m 16s
Structured Extraction
51m 36s
8.3K, 51% thinking4.2K, 91% thinking
9037.9s
Coding
52m 11s
11.3K, 38% thinking10.8K, 95% thinking
482m 1s
Grounded Answers
131m 24s
7.3K, 62% thinking6.1K, 91% thinking
811m 1s
Instruction Following
283m 10s
17.3K, 63% thinking8.7K, 91% thinking
841m 18s
Business Logic
01m 39s
9K, 50% thinking6K, 95% thinking
761m 7s
Security & permissions
81m 40s
9.1K, 75% thinking8.2K, 87% thinking
761m 59s
Diagnosis & investigation
01m 15s
6.8K, 98% thinking17.2K, 90% thinking
173m 34s

What you'd run

The build behind each score. Orange marks the faster, smaller, cheaper or longer-context side.

SpecAB
Speed
90 tok/s
107 tok/s
Machine
Apple M5 Pro, 48 GB
Hosted
Memory at 32K
12.9 GB
—
Context
128K
1M (better)
Cost per run
$2.46 est.
$0.41 (better)
Cost per case
$0.016 est.
$0.0027 (better)
Time per case
1m 56s
1m 42s (better)
Quantization
Q8_0
—
Harness
llama.cpp
openrouter

The race

No lead changes

Each model's running score as the test cases go by. The dashed line is a perfect run.

Mellum2.1 ThinkingMuse Spark 1.3 Contributor
025507510050100150Perfect run966

Every test case

153 test cases

Each square is one test case, colored by the model that scored higher.

2 won by Mellum2.1 Thinking101 won by Muse Spark 1.3 Contributor50 tied