Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8 Max

Model Markets Rankings

Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency

All rankings →
RankingMuse Glimmer 30BQwen3.8-Max
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimateUnrankedNot in the 36-model eligible cohort#19 of 36$0.107 per LiveBench case

Ranks come from the current complete eligible cohorts. Green highlights appear only when both models are ranked in the same metric. Missing required inputs remain unranked, and the three dimensions are not collapsed into an overall winner.

Benchmark Performance

Available Benchmarks

BenchmarkMuse Glimmer 30BQwen3.8-Max
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-01-011508720696 · arena_rating · leader1,391.9194% of row best · rating · muse-glimmer; 95% CI [1382.01378668, 1401.79860600]; votes 3696; rank 1481,479.56100% of row best · rating · qwen3.8-max; 95% CI [1473.34740586, 1485.77213629]; votes 13136; rank 12
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above0 benchmark wins1 benchmark winOverall lead

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

FieldAt a Glance
Meta · activeMuse Glimmer 30BVerified Sep 3, 2026
Qwen · activeQwen3.8 MaxVerified Aug 29, 2026

Technical Differences

Side-by-Side Facts

Indexable
FieldMuse Glimmer 30BQwen3.8-Max
DeveloperMetaQwen
FamilyMuse GlimmerQwen3 8 Max
ModelMuse Glimmer 30BQwen3.8-Max
VersionMuse Glimmer 30BQwen3.8-Max
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-08-09Unknown
Knowledge cutoff2026-01-04Unknown
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image, Video
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window131K1,000K
Total parameters29.8B2.4T
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
Licenseapache-2.0Unknown
Open weightsYesNo
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableYesNo
Provider accessDeepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)Alibaba Cloud Model Studio (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Openrouter (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolsagents, chat, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools, vision

14 comparable fields · 11 material differences · Pair passes the primary-source comparison gate

Muse Glimmer 30B Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Input price$0.30
Output price$1.20
Serving providers3
Canonical IDmeta-models/Muse-Glimmer-30B

Qwen3.8 Max Capabilities

agentschatreasoningstructured outputstoolsvision
Input price$1.65
Output price$4.951
Serving providers4
Canonical IDqwen/qwen3.8-max

Internal Comparison Graph

Related Comparisons

All image comparisons →
APairBContext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peerstext
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text
vscross-developer peersimage, text

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Muse Glimmer 30B vs Qwen3.8 Max FAQs

Is Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen3.8 Max better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Muse Glimmer 30B and Qwen3.8 Max, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen3.8 Max?+

Muse Glimmer 30B is $0.30 and Qwen3.8 Max is $1.65 per million tokens, so Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper on this metric. Muse Glimmer 30B is $1.20 and Qwen3.8 Max is $4.951 per million tokens, so Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen3.8 Max?+

Qwen3.8 Max has the larger sourced context window. Muse Glimmer 30B supports 131K and Qwen3.8 Max supports 1,000K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen3.8 Max?+

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 Qwen3.8 Max be self-hosted?+

Muse Glimmer 30B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Muse Glimmer 30B is open weight; Qwen3.8 Max is not marked open weight.

Can Muse Glimmer 30B and Qwen3.8 Max understand images?+

Muse Glimmer 30B is documented with image input; Qwen3.8 Max is documented with image input. This reflects supported input modalities, not vision quality.

Which can generate longer answers, Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen3.8 Max?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Muse Glimmer 30B is — and Qwen3.8 Max is 131K.

Do Muse Glimmer 30B and Qwen3.8 Max support reasoning and tool use?+

Muse Glimmer 30B: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Qwen3.8 Max: reasoning, tool calling, and image input. Feature support does not establish relative quality.

Which is available from more inference providers, Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen3.8 Max?+

Muse Glimmer 30B has 3 sourced provider routes; Qwen3.8 Max has 4, so Qwen3.8 Max has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Muse Glimmer 30B or Qwen3.8 Max?+

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