Enter opens the highlighted result. Esc closes.

Gemma 3 12B vs Muse Glimmer 30B

Muse Glimmer 30B leads Gemma 3 12B on the Artificial Analysis Intelligence Index, 17.5 to 3.8, and Gemma 3 12B costs 8.3x less per output token ($0.1625 vs $1.35 per million). Updated October 22, 2026; 3 benchmarks have a result for both.

Gemma 3 12BGoogle
Coding
No data
Overall
28.0
Output $/M
$0.1625
0
Muse Glimmer 30BMeta
Coding
No data
Overall
No data
Output $/M
$1.35
3
vs boards won of 3 shared

Gemma 3 12B or Muse Glimmer 30B: which to pick

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding.

Pick Gemma 3 12B for output tokens 8.3x cheaper ($0.1625 vs $1.35 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Shared results
3
Gemma 3 12B only
40
Muse Glimmer 30B only
2
Like-for-like categories
3 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.

At a glance

Coding index
Gemma 3 12B not benchmarked, Muse Glimmer 30B not benchmarked.
Widest category
Coding, 43.2 points apart on average over 1 shared benchmark.
Widest single gap
AA Coding Index: Gemma 3 12B 5.8 against Muse Glimmer 30B 49.0, 43.2 points apart on a 0 to 100 scale.
Output price
Gemma 3 12B $0.1625 against Muse Glimmer 30B $1.35 per million output tokens, 8.3x apart.
Context window
Both take 131K tokens.

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.

Boards won, where both have a result
CategoryGemma 3 12BBarsMuse Glimmer 30BTies
Coding01
Intelligence01
Agentic work01
All shared boards03
CodingLike-for-likeSix of these boards feed the Vibe Coding Index01
Coding benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Coding Index5.849.0Muse Glimmer 30B
LiveCodeBench (Artificial Analysis run)13.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
SciCode16.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Terminal-Bench Hard (Artificial Analysis run)0.8%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
ALE-BenchNot measured962.5Only Muse Glimmer 30B measured
LMArena Text: coding1281Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: software and IT1313Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
SciCode0.0%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
IntelligenceLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Intelligence benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Intelligence Index3.817.5Muse Glimmer 30B
Epoch Capabilities Index123.5Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Agentic workLike-for-likePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index01
Agentic work benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Agentic Index0.18.5Muse Glimmer 30B
τ²-Bench Telecom10.8%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Berkeley Function Calling Leaderboard (BFCL)30.4%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 38 boards here
ReasoningDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index6 boards, none shared
Reasoning benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
GPQA Diamond (Artificial Analysis run)34.9%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Humanity's Last Exam (Artificial Analysis run)4.2%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
GPQA Diamond (Epoch AI run)39.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts1309Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: expert1248Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: hard prompts in English1318Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 16 boards here
MathDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Math benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
AA Math Index18.3Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
AIME 2025 (Artificial Analysis run)18.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
OTIS Mock AIME16.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: math1307Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: mathematical work1336Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 8 boards here
KnowledgeDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index5 boards, none shared
Knowledge benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
MMLU Pro (Artificial Analysis run)59.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: science1366Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: medicine and healthcare1334Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: legal and government1381Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: business and finance1376Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 13 boards here
Web designDirectional onlyPublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index1 board, none shared
Web design benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
Design Arena: game devNot measured1144Only 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 index15 boards, none shared
General benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
IFBench36.7%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Long context reasoning (AA-LCR)8.3%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
DTBench48.8%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMCA4.5%Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text1334Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: instruction following1299Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: creative writing1331Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: English1349Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: non-English1318Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: German1370Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: Russian1335Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: multi-turn1334Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: longer queries1317Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: writing and language1307Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
LMArena Text: entertainment and media1297Not measuredOnly Gemma 3 12B measured
Neither model has a result on the other 31 boards here
Image generationNot comparablePublic boards, shown as published, kept out of the index0 boards, none shared
Image generation benchmarks for Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
BenchmarkGemma 3 12BMuse Glimmer 30BLeader
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

Gemma 3 12B$0.0002Fits in one request
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.0010Fits in one request

Gemma 3 12B costs less

Repository review

50K input + 3K output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.0042Fits in one request
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.020Fits in one request

Gemma 3 12B costs less

Agent loop

200K input + 10K output tokens

Gemma 3 12B$0.017Exceeds the context window
Muse Glimmer 30B$0.079Exceeds the context window

Gemma 3 12B 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.

Specifications of Gemma 3 12B and Muse Glimmer 30B
SpecificationGoogle Gemma 3 12BMeta Muse Glimmer 30B
MakerGoogleMeta
WeightsOpen weightsOpen weights
ReleasedMarch 13, 2025August 9, 2026
Context window131K131K
Input $/Mtok$0.075$0.325
Output $/Mtok$0.1625$1.35
Coding indexNot benchmarkedNot benchmarked
Independent measurements behind it00
Cost per solved taskNot computableNot computable
SourceOpenRouter listingOpenRouter listing

Questions

Is Gemma 3 12B better than Muse Glimmer 30B for coding?

Neither model has a coding score yet, so the two cannot be ranked on coding. Pick Gemma 3 12B for output tokens 8.3x cheaper ($0.1625 vs $1.35 per million) and work measured by AA Coding Index or AA Intelligence Index, where it leads.

Which is cheaper, Gemma 3 12B or Muse Glimmer 30B?

Gemma 3 12B costs $0.075 per million input tokens and $0.1625 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, Gemma 3 12B or Muse Glimmer 30B?

Neither: both take 131K tokens.

How many benchmarks is the Gemma 3 12B vs Muse Glimmer 30B comparison based on?

3 benchmarks have a result for both models as of October 22, 2026. Gemma 3 12B'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.

Compare next