# Muse Glimmer 30B

Meta · Open Weight · rank 135 · bench-align-v5 · Self-hosted

> Every figure below is reproduced as its upstream source published it: nothing is modelled, estimated, interpolated or converted. `Unavailable` means no source published the value — it is never a zero. Each value carries its evidence state and the date it was observed.

Page: https://modelscale.dev/models/muse-glimmer-30b  
JSON: https://modelscale.dev/api/model/muse-glimmer-30b

## Facts

| Field | Value | Evidence |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Canonical id | `muse-glimmer-30b` | — |
| Overall score | 41.15 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Context window | 131K tokens | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Release date | 2026-08-10 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Access type | Open Weight | — |
| Blended $/1M (75% input / 25% output) | $0.52 | Derived from the input and output rates below |

## Capability evidence

Seven axes from the ranking source. An axis the source did not score is unavailable, not zero.

| Axis | Score | Evidence |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Agentic | 50.5 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Coding | 41.6 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Knowledge | 49.9 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Reasoning | 82.2 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Multimodal & Grounded | 65.1 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Instruction Following | 81.1 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |
| Math | 84.6 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source benchlm:models |

## Runtime service evidence

Measured values with the date they were observed. Nothing is inferred from a sibling model or a provider claim. Regional or per-endpoint measurements appear only when the API supplies them; none are modelled.

| Measurement | Value | Observed | Last good | Evidence |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Time to first token | Unavailable | Unavailable | Unavailable | Unavailable · source benchlm:speed |
| Throughput | 103 tok/s | 2026-10-23 | 2026-10-23 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source openrouter:endpoints |

## Endpoint and price matrix

Every published price component, including cache reads and writes.

| Component | USD | Evidence |
| --- | --- | --- |
| Input / 1M tokens | $0.30 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source openrouter:pricing |
| Output / 1M tokens | $1.20 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source openrouter:pricing |
| Cache read / 1M tokens | $0.04 | Observed 2026-10-23 · source openrouter:pricing |
| Cache write / 1M tokens | Unavailable | Unavailable · source openrouter:pricing |
| Blended / 1M (75% input / 25% output) | $0.52 | Derived — from the input and output rates above; it has no source record of its own |
| Cost per successful task (LiveBench) | Unavailable | Fetch failed · source livebench:table |

**Self-hosted listing.** Meta publishes Muse Glimmer 30B under Apache 2.0 for local and self-hosted use, including full-precision and 4-bit checkpoints. Meta did not publish a first-party hosted API token price at launch, so the pricing catalog represents the open checkpoint as self-host/free-per-token before infrastructure costs. The rates above are a hosted price matched from another provider, not a first-party list price.

## Workload-aware monthly cost example

10 conversations per day × 8 messages × 22 active days, 1200 input and 400 output tokens per message, no cache. Derived here from the published rates above by this site's own calculator — not a figure any source published.

| Field | Value |
| --- | --- |
| Modelled monthly cost | $1.48 |
| Modelled tokens | 2.82M |

## Benchmark record

34 matched benchmark rows with their published value, unit, and provenance.

### Knowledge

| Benchmark | Value | Tasks | Difficulty | Provenance |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index | 17.5 | Cross-benchmark intelligence index | Display-only external reference | [Artificial Analysis](https://artificialanalysis.ai/) |
| AA-GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis GPQA Diamond) | 83.5 | Graduate-level science questions | Graduate-level science reasoning | [Artificial Analysis GPQA Diamond Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/gpqa-diamond) |
| AA-HLE (Artificial Analysis Humanity's Last Exam) | 22.0 | Expert-level questions | Frontier expert reasoning | [Artificial Analysis Humanity's Last Exam Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/hle) |
| AA-Omniscience Index (Artificial Analysis Omniscience Index) | -32.8 | Knowledge questions | Broad factual knowledge | [AA-Omniscience: Knowledge and Hallucination Benchmark](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/omniscience) |
| AA-Omniscience Accuracy (Artificial Analysis Omniscience Accuracy) | 27.0 | Knowledge questions | Broad knowledge | [Artificial Analysis model benchmarks](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/grok-4-3) |
| AA-Omniscience Hallucination Rate (Artificial Analysis Omniscience Hallucination Rate) | 81.9 | Knowledge questions | Factuality | [Artificial Analysis model benchmarks](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/grok-4-3) |

### Coding

| Benchmark | Value | Tasks | Difficulty | Provenance |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| Terminal-Bench 2.1 | 51.7 | Terminal-based software-agent tasks | Professional software engineering | [Terminal-Bench](https://www.tbench.ai/) |
| SWE-bench Verified (Software Engineering Benchmark Verified) | 76 | 500 verified issues | Professional software engineering | [SWE-bench: Can Language Models Resolve Real-World GitHub Issues?](https://arxiv.org/abs/2310.06770) |
| SWE-bench Pro | 51.2 | 1,865 repository problems | Long-horizon professional engineering | [SWE-Bench Pro: Can AI Agents Solve Long-Horizon Software Engineering Tasks?](https://arxiv.org/abs/2509.16941) |
| SciCode (Scientific Code Benchmark) | 43.6 | — | — | [BenchLM](https://benchlm.ai/benchmarks/scicode) |
| AA Coding Index (Artificial Analysis Coding Index) | 49.0 | Cross-benchmark coding index | Display-only external reference | [Artificial Analysis model leaderboards](https://artificialanalysis.ai/leaderboards/models) |
| AA-SciCode (Artificial Analysis SciCode) | 44.9 | Scientific coding subproblems | Scientific programming | [Artificial Analysis SciCode Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/scicode) |

### Mathematics

| Benchmark | Value | Tasks | Difficulty | Provenance |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| AIME26 (AIME 2026) | 94.7 | Competition math problems | Olympiad-style mathematics | [Qwen3.6 launch benchmarks](https://qwen.ai/blog?id=qwen3.6) |

### Reasoning

| Benchmark | Value | Tasks | Difficulty | Provenance |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| AA-LCR (Artificial Analysis Long Context Reasoning) | 83.3 | Long-context reasoning tasks | Long-context reasoning | [Artificial Analysis model benchmarks](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/grok-4-3) |
| MLCR-AA (Medical Long Context Reasoning (MLCR-AA)) | 20.0 | Long, fragmented medical-record reasoning | Long-context medical reasoning | [Medical Long Context Reasoning (MLCR-AA)](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/mlcr-aa) |
| CritPt (Critical Physics Tasks) | 2.6 | Research-level physics questions | Research-level physics reasoning | [CritPt Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/critpt) |

### Instruction Following

| Benchmark | Value | Tasks | Difficulty | Provenance |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| IFBench (Instruction Following Benchmark) | 77 | — | — | [BenchLM](https://benchlm.ai/benchmarks/ifbench) |

### Agentic

| Benchmark | Value | Tasks | Difficulty | Provenance |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| AA Briefcase (Artificial Analysis Briefcase) | 477 | Professional knowledge-work tasks | Professional work | [Artificial Analysis Briefcase Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/aa-briefcase) |
| AA AutomationBench (Artificial Analysis AutomationBench) | 6.8 | Business-process automation tasks | Agentic automation | [Artificial Analysis AutomationBench Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/automationbench-aa) |
| AA EnterpriseOps-Gym (Artificial Analysis EnterpriseOps-Gym) | 34.7 | Enterprise operations workflows | Enterprise agent operations | [Artificial Analysis EnterpriseOps-Gym Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/enterprise-ops-gym-aa) |
| AA Tau3 Banking (Artificial Analysis Tau3-Banking) | 23.5 | Banking tool-use workflows | Agentic banking workflows | [Artificial Analysis Tau3-Banking Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/tau3-banking) |
| GDPval-AA | 893 | Agentic real-world work tasks | Professional agentic workflows | [DeepSeek-V4 Technical Report](https://huggingface.co/deepseek-ai/DeepSeek-V4-Pro/blob/main/DeepSeek_V4.pdf) |
| GDPval-AA (GDPval-AA normalized) | 14.3 | Economically valuable tasks | Professional agentic workflows | [Artificial Analysis model benchmarks](https://artificialanalysis.ai/models/grok-4-3) |
| AA Agentic Index (Artificial Analysis Agentic Index) | 10.5 | Cross-benchmark agentic index | Display-only external reference | [Artificial Analysis model leaderboards](https://artificialanalysis.ai/leaderboards/models) |
| AA Terminal-Bench 4.0 (Artificial Analysis Terminal-Bench v4.0) | 0.5 | Terminal-based agent tasks | Agentic software engineering | [Artificial Analysis Terminal-Bench v4.0 Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/terminalbench-v4-0) |
| GDP.pdf (Artificial Analysis GDP.pdf) | 10.0 | Professional document-production tasks | Professional knowledge work | [GDP.pdf Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/gdp-pdf) |
| OSWorld-Verified | 65.9 | 369 real-world computer tasks (361 when eight Google Drive tasks are excluded) | Multi-step desktop and cross-application workflows | [OSWorld](https://os-world.github.io/) |
| MCP Atlas | 75.5 | Tool-integrated agent tasks | Advanced tool use | [Introducing GPT-5.4 mini and nano](https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5-4-mini-and-nano/) |
| DeepSearchQA | 74.6 | Agentic browsing and list-answer questions | Agentic web research | [Muse Spark Eval Methodology](https://ai.meta.com/static-resource/muse-spark-eval-methodology) |

### Multimodal & Grounded

| Benchmark | Value | Tasks | Difficulty | Provenance |
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
| MMMU-Pro (Massive Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Pro) | 74 | Multimodal academic reasoning | Frontier multimodal | [MMMU-Pro: A More Robust Multi-discipline Multimodal Understanding Benchmark](https://arxiv.org/abs/2409.02813) |
| AA-MMMU-Pro (Artificial Analysis MMMU-Pro) | 74.3 | Multimodal academic reasoning | Frontier multimodal | [Artificial Analysis MMMU-Pro Benchmark Leaderboard](https://artificialanalysis.ai/evaluations/mmmu-pro) |
| OmniDocBench 1.5 | 75.8 | Document understanding tasks | Grounded document reasoning | [Introducing GPT-5.4 mini and nano](https://openai.com/index/introducing-gpt-5-4-mini-and-nano/) |
| ScreenSpot Pro | 75.4 | 1,581 grounding instructions | Professional GUI grounding | [ScreenSpot-Pro: GUI Grounding for Professional High-Resolution Computer Use](https://arxiv.org/abs/2504.07981) |
| CharXiv (CharXiv Reasoning) | 78.8 | Scientific chart reasoning | Scientific visualization reasoning | [CharXiv: Charting Gaps in Realistic Chart Understanding in Multimodal LLMs](https://charxiv.github.io/) |

## Lifecycle and limitations log

Lifecycle events the source associates with this model.

No lifecycle event references this model. That is not evidence the model has no lifecycle plan — only that this source published none.

## What this profile does not claim

Values are reproduced exactly as their sources published them, in the units those sources declared; none are converted, interpolated, or averaged across providers. Any field marked unavailable was attempted and not returned. Last attempted fetch for this model's score: 2026-10-23 13:17 UTC.