Muse Glimmer 30B vs GPT-5.4 Nano
At a Glance
| Compare |  Muse Glimmer 30BMeta |  GPT-5.4 NanoOpenAI |
|---|---|---|
| Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency | ||
| IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5 | UnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort | #42 of 4614.7 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate | UnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort | #14 of 44$0.058 per LiveBench case |
| EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5 | UnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort | #37 of 3837.5 score · 3/3 sources · complete |
| Pricing and Limits | ||
| Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $0.30Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 21, 2026 | $0.20Openai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens | $1.20Deepinfra ↗ · Sep 21, 2026 | $1.25Openai ↗ · Sep 3, 2026 |
| Context windowMaximum documented tokens | 131K | 400K |
| Model facts checked | Sep 3, 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
| Benchmark | Muse Glimmer 30B | GPT-5.4 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader | 1,391.83100% of row best · rating · muse-glimmer; 95% CI [1381.91395107, 1401.75084313]; votes 3666; rank 152 | 1,372.8699% of row best · rating · gpt-5.4-nano-high; 95% CI [1369.01237938, 1376.71496043]; votes 58424; rank 167 |
| Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above | 1 benchmark winNo overall winner | 0 benchmark winsNo 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
| Field | Muse Glimmer 30B | GPT-5.4 Nano |
|---|---|---|
| Developer | Meta | OpenAI |
| Family | Muse Glimmer | Gpt 5 4 |
| Model | Muse Glimmer 30B | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Version | Muse Glimmer 30B | GPT-5.4 Nano |
| Lifecycle | active | active |
| Released | 2026-08-09 | 2026-03-17 |
| Knowledge cutoff | 2026-01-04 | 2025-08-31 |
| Input modalities | Text, Image | Text, Image |
| Output modalities | Text | Text |
| Context window | 131K | 400K |
| Total parameters | 29.8B | Unknown |
| Active parameters | Unknown | Unknown |
| License | apache-2.0 | Unknown |
| Open weights | Yes | No |
| API available | Yes | Yes |
| Self-hostable | Yes | No |
| Provider access | Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard) | Openai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard) |
| Capabilities | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools | chat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools |
Muse Glimmer 30B Capabilities
GPT-5.4 Nano Capabilities
Related Comparisons
All image comparisons →| A | Pair | B | Context |
|---|---|---|---|
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | vs | GPT-6 AstraOpenAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Claude Fable 5.1Anthropic | vs | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 Gemini 3.1 ProGoogle DeepMind | vs | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | cross-developer peerstext |
 DeepSeek-V4.1-FlashDeepSeek | vs | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | vs | Grok 4.6xAI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | vs |  Qwen3.8-MaxQwen | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | vs |  Kimi-K3Moonshot AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
 MiniMax-M3MiniMax | vs | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | vs |  GLM-5.3Z.ai | cross-developer peerstext |
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | vs |  Hy4 previewTencent | cross-developer peerstext |
Seed 2.1 ProByteDance Seed | vs | Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta | vs |  Mistral Large 3Mistral AI | cross-developer peersimage, text |
Primary Evidence
Sources and Freshness
Questions
Muse Glimmer 30B vs GPT-5.4 Nano FAQs
Is Muse Glimmer 30B or GPT-5.4 Nano better for coding?+
This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Muse Glimmer 30B and GPT-5.4 Nano, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.
Which is cheaper, Muse Glimmer 30B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+
Muse Glimmer 30B is $0.30 and GPT-5.4 Nano is $0.20 per million tokens, so GPT-5.4 Nano is cheaper on this metric. Muse Glimmer 30B is $1.20 and GPT-5.4 Nano is $1.25 per million tokens, so Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper on this metric.
Which has a larger context window, Muse Glimmer 30B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+
GPT-5.4 Nano has the larger sourced context window. Muse Glimmer 30B supports 131K and GPT-5.4 Nano supports 400K.
Which performs better in benchmarks, Muse Glimmer 30B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+
There is no overall benchmark winner: At least two independently verified, protocol-matched benchmarks are required for an overall winner.
Can Muse Glimmer 30B or GPT-5.4 Nano be self-hosted?+
Muse Glimmer 30B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Muse Glimmer 30B is open weight; GPT-5.4 Nano is not marked open weight.
Can Muse Glimmer 30B and GPT-5.4 Nano understand images?+
Muse Glimmer 30B is documented with image input; GPT-5.4 Nano is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.
Which can generate longer answers, Muse Glimmer 30B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+
Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Muse Glimmer 30B is — and GPT-5.4 Nano is 128K.
Do Muse Glimmer 30B and GPT-5.4 Nano support reasoning and tool use?+
Muse Glimmer 30B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. GPT-5.4 Nano: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.
Which is available from more inference providers, Muse Glimmer 30B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+
Muse Glimmer 30B has 3 sourced provider routes; GPT-5.4 Nano has 2, so Muse Glimmer 30B has broader tracked availability.
Which offers better value, Muse Glimmer 30B or GPT-5.4 Nano?+
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.