Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber vs Muse Glimmer 30B
At a Glance
| Compare | Gemini 3.8 Flash CyberGoogle DeepMind | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta |
|---|---|---|
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $0.30Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | Not reported | $1.20Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 22, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | Not reported | 131K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 2, 2026View model evidence → | Sep 3, 2026View model evidence → |
Token prices are the lowest available sourced USD rates; input and output may use different providers. Cost ranking estimates output spend on LiveBench, not a full request bill. Ranking methodology →
Available Benchmarks
Side-by-Side Facts
| Field | Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber | Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Google DeepMind | Meta |
| Family | Gemini 3 | Muse Glimmer |
| Model | Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| Version | Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-09-02 | 2026-08-09 |
| Knowledge cutoff | Unknown | 2026-01-04 |
| Input modalities | Text | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | Unknown | 131K |
| Total parameters | Unknown | 29.8B |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | Unknown | apache-2.0 |
| Open weights | No | Yes |
| API available | No | Yes |
| Self-hostable | No | Yes |
| Provider access | Unknown | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) |
| Capabilities | automated-patching, cybersecurity, reasoning, vulnerability-detection | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber Capabilities
Muse Glimmer 30B Capabilities
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber vs Muse Glimmer 30B FAQs
Is Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Muse Glimmer 30B better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and Muse Glimmer 30B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Muse Glimmer 30B?+
Only Muse Glimmer 30B has a directly sourced input price: $0.30 per million tokens. Only Muse Glimmer 30B has a directly sourced output price: $1.20 per million tokens.
Which has a larger context window, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Muse Glimmer 30B?+
Neither model has a larger sourced context window in this comparison. Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is — and Muse Glimmer 30B is 131K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Muse Glimmer 30B?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Muse Glimmer 30B be self-hosted?+
Muse Glimmer 30B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is not marked open weight; Muse Glimmer 30B is open weight.
Can Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and Muse Glimmer 30B understand images?+
Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is not documented with image input; Muse Glimmer 30B is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Muse Glimmer 30B?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber is — and Muse Glimmer 30B is —.
Do Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber and Muse Glimmer 30B support reasoning and tool use?+
Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber: reasoning. Muse Glimmer 30B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Muse Glimmer 30B?+
Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber has 0 sourced provider routes; Muse Glimmer 30B has 3, so Muse Glimmer 30B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Gemini 3.8 Flash Cyber or Muse Glimmer 30B?+
There is no universal value winner. Compare the input and output prices above with the matched benchmark result for your workload: cheaper tokens can be offset by different quality, token usage, latency, or provider availability.