Claude Opus 4.7 vs Muse Glimmer 30B

At a Glance

Compare
Intelligence, Cost, and Efficiency
IntelligenceHigher is better · MM Intelligence v2.5#11 of 4679.0 score · 3/3 sources · completeUnrankedNot in the 46-model eligible cohort
CostLower is better · Published-token output estimate#37 of 44$0.286 per LiveBench caseUnrankedNot in the 44-model eligible cohort
EfficiencyHigher is better · MM Efficiency v1.5#20 of 3852.7 score · 3/3 sources · completeUnrankedNot in the 38-model eligible cohort
Pricing and Limits
Input priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$5.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026$0.30Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026
Output priceFrom · USD / 1M tokens$25.00Anthropic · Sep 3, 2026$1.20Deepinfra · Sep 21, 2026
Context windowMaximum documented tokens1,000K131K
Model facts checkedSep 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

All benchmark results →
BenchmarkClaude Opus 4.7Muse Glimmer 30B
LMArena Text Arenatext-2026-09-13-d25aabda0010 · arena_rating · leader1,483.36100% of row best · rating · claude-opus-4-7; 95% CI [1479.49740558, 1487.21455301]; votes 61128; rank 121,391.8394% of row best · rating · muse-glimmer; 95% CI [1381.91395107, 1401.75084313]; votes 3666; rank 152
Overall ResultCounted from the protocol-matched rows above1 benchmark winNo overall winner0 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

FieldClaude Opus 4.7Muse Glimmer 30B
DeveloperAnthropicMeta
FamilyClaude 4Muse Glimmer
ModelClaude Opus 4.7Muse Glimmer 30B
VersionClaude Opus 4.7Muse Glimmer 30B
Lifecycleactiveactive
Released2026-04-162026-08-09
Knowledge cutoff2026-01-012026-01-04
Input modalitiesText, ImageText, Image
Output modalitiesTextText
Context window1,000K131K
Total parametersUnknown29.8B
Active parametersUnknownUnknown
LicenseUnknownapache-2.0
Open weightsNoYes
API availableYesYes
Self-hostableNoYes
Provider accessAnthropic (Standard), Deepinfra (Standard)Deepinfra (Standard), Fireworks Ai (Standard), Together Ai (Standard)
Capabilitieschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, toolschat, generation, reasoning, structured_outputs, tools

Claude Opus 4.7 Capabilities

chatgenerationreasoningstructured outputstools
Serving providers2
Canonical IDanthropic/claude-opus-4-7

Muse Glimmer 30B Capabilities

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

Primary Evidence

Sources and Freshness

Questions

Claude Opus 4.7 vs Muse Glimmer 30B FAQs

Is Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Glimmer 30B better for coding?+

This comparison does not currently contain a protocol-matched coding benchmark for both Claude Opus 4.7 and Muse Glimmer 30B, so Model Markets cannot name a coding leader from pricing, context size, or capability labels alone.

Which is cheaper, Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Glimmer 30B?+

Claude Opus 4.7 is $5.00 and Muse Glimmer 30B is $0.30 per million tokens, so Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper on this metric. Claude Opus 4.7 is $25.00 and Muse Glimmer 30B is $1.20 per million tokens, so Muse Glimmer 30B is cheaper on this metric.

Which has a larger context window, Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Glimmer 30B?+

Claude Opus 4.7 has the larger sourced context window. Claude Opus 4.7 supports 1,000K and Muse Glimmer 30B supports 131K.

Which performs better in benchmarks, Claude Opus 4.7 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 Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Glimmer 30B be self-hosted?+

Muse Glimmer 30B is the only model in this pair currently marked as self-hostable. Claude Opus 4.7 is not marked open weight; Muse Glimmer 30B is open weight.

Can Claude Opus 4.7 and Muse Glimmer 30B understand images?+

Claude Opus 4.7 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, Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Glimmer 30B?+

Neither has a larger sourced maximum output. Claude Opus 4.7 is 128K and Muse Glimmer 30B is —.

Do Claude Opus 4.7 and Muse Glimmer 30B support reasoning and tool use?+

Claude Opus 4.7: reasoning, 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, Claude Opus 4.7 or Muse Glimmer 30B?+

Claude Opus 4.7 has 2 sourced provider routes; Muse Glimmer 30B has 3, so Muse Glimmer 30B has broader tracked availability.

Which offers better value, Claude Opus 4.7 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