Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B leads Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 17.5 to 10.4, and Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs 3.4x less per output token ($0.40 vs $1.35 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 1 benchmarks have a result for both.
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Muse Glimmer 30B: which to pick
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.
Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 3.4x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.35 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 131K tokens).
- Shared results
- 1
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite only
- 29
- Muse Glimmer 30B only
- 4
- Like-for-like categories
- 1 of 9
Only benchmarks that tested both models count toward a pick; a result only one model has is shown but not compared.
Which one for your work
Each card is decided by one number both models carry. Where only one has it, the card says so and makes no call.
Coding
Vibe Coding Index, six public coding benchmarks
No call
Neither has a coding score yet.
One side not measured
Intelligence
AA Intelligence Index
Muse Glimmer 30B
Muse Glimmer 30B leads, 17.5 against 10.4.
Same board, both measured
Agentic work
AA Agentic Index
No call
Only Muse Glimmer 30B has a AA Agentic Index result, 8.5.
Directional only
Reasoning
GPQA Diamond
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a GPQA Diamond result, 70.2%.
Directional only
Math
AIME
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a AIME result, 42.1%.
Directional only
Knowledge
MMLU Pro
No call
Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite has a MMLU Pro result, 79.1%.
Directional only
Long documents
Listed context window
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens against 131K.
Listed by OpenRouter
Everyday cost
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.0003, Muse Glimmer 30B $0.0010 per turn.
List prices
At a glance
- Coding index
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite not benchmarked, Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked.
- Widest category
- Intelligence, 7.1 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
- Widest single gap
- AA Intelligence Index: Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite 10.4 against Muse Glimmer 30B 17.5, 7.1 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
- Output price
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite $0.40 against Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 per million output tokens, 3.4x apart.
- Context window
- Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite takes 1.05M tokens, Muse Glimmer 30B 131K.
Benchmark by benchmark
First the score: boards each model leads, per category, where both have a result. Then every board, a category to a fold; bars are each result on a 0 to 100 scale, so compare the two in a row, not one row with another.
| Category | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Bars | Muse Glimmer 30B | Ties |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Intelligence | 0 | 1 | ||
| All shared boards | 0 | 1 |
CodingDirectional onlySix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Coding Index | Not measured | 49.0 | Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Vals AI) | 71.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run) | 59.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run) | 4.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| ALE-Bench | Not measured | 962.5 | Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 34 boards here | |||
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Intelligence Index | 10.4 | 17.5 | Muse Glimmer 30B |
| Epoch Capabilities Index | 133.8 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
Agentic workDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index3 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AA Agentic Index | Not measured | 8.5 | Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured |
| τ²-Bench Telecom | 19.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL) | 36.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here | |||
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| GPQA Diamond | 70.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MMMU Pro (Vals AI) | 75.4% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run) | 62.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run) | 6.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Kagi LLM Benchmark | 40.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 17 boards here | |||
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index4 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| AIME | 42.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MGSM (Vals AI) | 89.5% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| AA Math Index | 53.3 | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run) | 53.3% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 9 boards here | |||
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index8 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| MMLU Pro | 79.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LegalBench (Vals AI) | 82.0% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| CorpFin (Vals AI) | 57.6% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| TaxEval (Vals AI) | 66.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MortgageTax (Vals AI) | 57.6% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedQA (Vals AI) | 88.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedCode (Vals AI) | 34.2% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run) | 75.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 10 boards here | |||
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Design Arena: game dev | Not measured | 1144 | Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here | |||
GeneralDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| SAGE (Vals AI) | 30.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| MedScribe (Vals AI) | 75.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| IFBench | 49.9% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Long context reasoning (AA-LCR) | 55.7% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| DTBench | 62.8% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| LMCA | 18.1% | Not measured | Only Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite measured |
| Neither model has a result on the other 40 boards here | |||
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
| Benchmark | Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Muse Glimmer 30B | Leader |
|---|---|---|---|
| Neither model has a result on 5 boards here | |||
What each workload costs
Three fixed token mixes at each model's listed price, so per-token rates become a bill.
Chat turn
1K input + 500 output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less
Repository review
50K input + 3K output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less
Agent loop
200K input + 10K output tokens
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs less
Listed OpenRouter rates, without cache or batch discounts. A workload that does not fit a model's context window would need splitting.
Specification differences
The leading value in a row is marked; a row with a missing value names no leader. Our two rows are marked in red.
| Specification | Google Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite | Meta Muse Glimmer 30B |
|---|---|---|
| Maker | Meta | |
| Weights | No public weights listed | Open weights |
| Released | July 22, 2025 | August 9, 2026 |
| Context window | 1.05M | 131K |
| Input $/Mtok | $0.10 | $0.325 |
| Output $/Mtok | $0.40 | $1.35 |
| Coding index | Not benchmarked | Not benchmarked |
| Independent measurements behind it | 0 | 0 |
| Cost per solved task | Not computable | Not computable |
| Source | OpenRouter listing | OpenRouter listing |
Questions
Is Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite better than Muse Glimmer 30B for coding?
Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite for output tokens 3.4x cheaper ($0.40 vs $1.35 per million) and a larger context window (1.05M against 131K tokens).
Which is cheaper, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite costs $0.10 per million input tokens and $0.40 per million output tokens; Muse Glimmer 30B costs $0.325 and $1.35. Cost per solved task is known for neither of them.
Which has the bigger context window, Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite or Muse Glimmer 30B?
Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite, with 1.05M tokens against 131K.
How many benchmarks is the Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite vs Muse Glimmer 30B comparison based on?
1 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemini 2.5 Flash Lite's coding index rests on 0 independent benchmarks and Muse Glimmer 30B's on 0. Where only one model has a result, the page says so instead of naming a winner.