Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct vs Muse Glimmer 30B

At a Glance

Compare
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.10Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026$0.30Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$0.30Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026$1.20Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens10,000K131K
Model facts checkedAug 28, 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

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructMuse Glimmer 30B
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,279.2992% of row best · rating · llama-4-scout-17b-16e-instruct; 95% CI [1274.57681953, 1284.00026285]; votes 29740; rank 2591,391.83100% of row best · rating · muse-glimmer; 95% CI [1381.91395107, 1401.75084313]; votes 3666; rank 152
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 benchmark winsNo overall winner1 benchmark winNo overall winner

Third-party benchmark Only like-for-like primary-publisher results are shown; raw scores, relative scores, configuration, and token spend remain visible.

Side-by-Side Facts

FieldLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructMuse Glimmer 30B
DeveloperMetaMeta
FamilyLlama 4 Scout 17b 16e InstructMuse Glimmer
ModelLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructMuse Glimmer 30B
VersionLlama-4-Scout-17B-16E-InstructMuse Glimmer 30B
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2025-04-052026-08-09
Knowledge cutoffUnknown2026-01-04
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window10,000K131K
Total parameters108.6B29.8B
Active parameters17BUnknown
Licenseotherapache-2.0
Open weightsYesYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesYes
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Hugging Face (Standard), Openrouter (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct Capabilities

chatgenerationtools
Serving providers4
Canonical IDmeta-llama/Llama-4-Scout-17B-16E-Instruct

Muse Glimmer 30B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers3
Canonical IDmeta-models/Muse-Glimmer-30B

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct vs Muse Glimmer 30B FAQs

Is Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Glimmer 30B better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and Muse Glimmer 30B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Glimmer 30B?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is $0.10 and Muse Glimmer 30B is $0.30 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is cheaper on this metric. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is $0.30 and Muse Glimmer 30B is $1.20 per million tokens, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Glimmer 30B?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has the larger sourced context window. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct supports 10,000K and Muse Glimmer 30B supports 131K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct 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 Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Glimmer 30B be self-hosted?+

Both models have the same recorded self-hosting status: supported. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is open weight; Muse Glimmer 30B is open weight.

Can Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and Muse Glimmer 30B understand images?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is 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, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Glimmer 30B?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct is — and Muse Glimmer 30B is —.

Do Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct and Muse Glimmer 30B support reasoning and tool use?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct: tool calling and image input. Muse Glimmer 30B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct or Muse Glimmer 30B?+

Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has 4 sourced provider routes; Muse Glimmer 30B has 3, so Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Llama 4 Scout 17B 16E Instruct 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.

Send Feedback